Fauxtogs who should end up on the main page…

[emf]

I think that must be a composite iliketag, that baby is very young and it’s head would just flop. Seems weird to go to the trouble to do a comp like that, but not to go to the bother of getting a good quality image(s) in the first place.

[iliketag]

Seems like an odd composite. Not just due to the quality but because it looks like they didn’t support both sides of the baby. Perhaps just the head, but not the arms? I’m relieved, I’ve never handled an infant that young so I had no idea! Thanks for helping put my mind at ease!

I don’t know if you guys looked at anymore of their facebook photos, but they did a friend of mine’s wedding so I was really surprised to see how bad the rest of the gallery was! One has a family that’s out of focus but the couch they’re sitting on is totally in focus! It made me cringe a little. That can happen to anyone, of course… but don’t share it!

[alexandra]

So the other day, my sister brought home proofs from her school photo session. They weren’t terrible, but the background they used surprised me a bit. It was one of those “hand-painted, scenic backdrops”, and yes, the way it was painted (combined with depth of field and proximity of the subjects to that background), you could see the paint splotches, and it looked like they just posed the students in front of some mediocre painting produced in one of the art classes. So I took it to their website. From their other work, you can tell they seem to have other, more typical backdrops they’ve previously used, but that’s not the point. They do seem to use a single-light setup for most of their studio work, creating very flat-looking photos, but their wedding photography is much worse in my opinion. Weird framing, flash for just about everything, not to mention the photo they used for the banner at the top of their website is not even in focus…

http://reflectionsfp.com/

The way they made their gallery, you can’t link to their photos individually, but some of my favourites are:
The baby’s head photoshopped into a yellow rose in the “portraits” section
Anything found in “Samantha and Jerry’s Album” (after clicking the “wedding photo galleries” section)
The black and white photo from “Engagement photos” that just looks like a creepshot taken with flash of an unsuspecting couple in the woods

[cameraclicker]

Flowers and photography?   I’m surprised they aren’t carrying wedding dresses for rent, too.

Too bad Jeremy broke his leg.  Samantha & Jeremy’s wedding photos look much better than Christina & Shawn’s!  I wonder if they were by different photographers.

Full screen the baby’s head in the yellow rose looks like there aren’t enough pixels in the image for that size, but in the smaller version it’s not too bad.  The scale is about right for the flower to hold a body that matches the head.

From another thread here, this set of wedding photos is several levels worse:  https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151710333068491&set=a.10151710332708491.1073741835.221518668490&type=1&permPage=1

[fstopper89]

Those weddings photos are awful!

However, this shot is the only one out of all of them that I kind of like. But it should have been cropped way in. The top of the chair is awkward, and the shoes being in there are distracting. I also think they used a “rays of sun” action since I saw the same effect awkwardly placed in a ceremony photo.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151725012043491&set=a.10151710332708491.1073741835.221518668490&type=3&theater

[seth]

re: the propped up baby

So back when I first wanted to find out how to do that, I was watching videos on YouTube.  It didn’t even occur to me that they might be composites but I found this video where this photographer had this whole professional set up and was “teaching” newborn photography.  I wish I knew where it was now.  But she propped the baby up like that, all gently, and held the head then stepped back and took photos real quick and the baby fell over and she went back to pose the baby again.  She was seriously all like, “that’s how you do it, folks!”

[seth]

I HATE wedding albums that are put together like that – all 1990’s digital looking.

reflectionsfp is just bad over all.  Makes you wonder how they get the contract for school photography in the first place.  Actually, they probably got it because they are the cheapest and they are the cheapest because their work is crap.  Like the woman who’s in the town I was-kinda-from.  Her work is horrendous, I’ve linked to her before.  She clearly has very little idea what she’s doing but somehow she gets all the business.  Small town mentality, I guess.

[fstopper89]

I am part of a FB photography group that has a lot of members and is very helpful for advice and questions. The members range from seasoned pros to beginner enthusiasts, and I offer lots of help. There is one particular member who posts for advice often and I feel like she’s a lost cause. She has actually been featured within these forums multiple times. For all the advice she’s gotten on the group page, it doesn’t show at all. She is definitely a fauxtographer. I mean kudos to her for asking lots of advice, but how is it not sinking in? Her photography is terrible. Her watermark is cheesy, she seems to be using pop-up flash (especially on babies and toddlers), she is building a studio with no knowledge on studio work, (fauxtogs seem to think that they will suddenly become better photographers once they build a studio), she gaussian-blurs the backgrounds on tons of stuff with terrible masking, uses a green screen with the digital backgrounds she purchased (WHY??) and they look terrible, and her posts and grammar on her page are not very professional. She does lots of weird editing. There were two portraits of a senior girl that were actually in focus and had nice, real backgrounds, but they are really underexposed. It actually could have been fixed with proper editing, but all the editing she cares about seem to be fake blurs and digital backgrounds!

I don’t really want to link her, but just wanted to say this. If she were an enthusiast I wouldn’t care, but she’s heavily advertising as a pro and pushing her wedding photography- which is the worst.

[cameraclicker]

If she is near you, be grateful her work is bad and she doesn’t seem to learn.  If she is not close enough to be competition, all you can do is shake your head and carry on.

[fstopper89]

Not local. Even if she were, not competition, lol.

People have been trying to help her a lot! She posted on that group today asking about advice for some wedding photos. People told her that the one photo was completely out of focus and she should not present that to the client.

She advertises on a wedding vendor website and has some kind of badge on her profile that says “Best Wedding Photographer Award” and shared it to her page citing “What an honor!” It’s not a real award at all. And I don’t know how she got on that vendor website. Maybe anyone can join.

[foxtog]

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.235559193237372.54117.175746772551948&type=1  I shared these earlier with the caption – “great composition” and facebook banned me for 24 hours and unpublished my page.  But they are simply too good to miss!

 

[foxtog]

Oh my god, he’s cannot be serious.  Can he?

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.235559193237372.54117.175746772551948&type=1

[BCLC]

^^ Cain seems to have a real talent for making attractive people really ugly!!

Sorry had to be said look at this….

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=411640072295949&set=a.409562255837064.1073741885.175746772551948&type=3&theater

the whole album is bad not the model but the execution!

[foxtog]

I think the masons took down my page, bwaaaaaaa

[KatarinaLOL]

^  Yes, Facebook removed your stupid page.  I’m sure everyone here reported it, I know I did.

[Author]

Posts