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 8 years, 6 months ago by
cameraclicker.
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 3, 2014 at 11:14 am #18087
wtf
ParticipantApril 3, 2014 at 4:37 pm #18088nesgran
ParticipantI wonder if the poor girl was expecting that end result… A couple of the shots I looked at them thinking when is the final level of image going to load as it looked like a blown up thumbnail, turns out her photos were just that blurry.
Not unexpected though when you see that a month ago she had a rebel kit lens as her profile photo which looks a lot like it was taken with nifty fifty. Looking through her posts it seems that she had a previous photography business that shut three years ago after lasting two and she’s now started a new company. She has registered for tax which is far more than I expected but she’s been going for a couple of months before doing so. Some of her photos actually look pretty appealing but on the whole she is well into fauxland
Finally, I had to google wth a lightscoop is. Turns out it is a little mirror you stick on your pop up flash to diffuse it by bouncing off the ceiling. FFS, get a couple of china speedlights off ebay and do it properly.
April 3, 2014 at 6:32 pm #18094cameraclicker
ParticipantThat Lightscoop looks neat! I like the more advanced one that can tilt and swivel. I don’t think I will get one thought. I usually use a 430 EX II with my Rebel. It has a lot more power than the pop-up.
Going through her page I see she got a new lens, too. She got a 35-80 mm, which I had not heard of. This is what Ken Rockwell had to say about it:
This Canon 35-80mm lens is currently under review. It’s an all-plastic lens with iffy performance if you’re picky, however it’s a weightless lens that covers the important focal lengths and focuses fast and super close.
Resolution is sloppy compared to the 24-70mm f/2.8 L II, and there is no lens correction profile available, but for actual shooting as you can see, it’s fine.
I guess if you are going to be a low price leader, you should keep your costs low. The sample photo on Ken’s page looked pretty good.
I have a Rebel T2i. I loved it the moment I saw it, and it takes excellent photos. Canon is up to the T5i now, though the performance that really matters has not changed enough to cause me to upgrade. I lost track of the shutter count around 40 thousand shots. The body is not as rugged as a 7D or even a 60D, but if you take care of it, it will serve well and the photos should be just as good as from either more expensive body. It is not as good in low light as the 1Dx, 5D Mk III or 6D, but then neither is the 5D Mk II and those are still being used to take lots of excellent portrait and wedding photos.
In her blog, she says she upgraded her gear! It sounds like it is still all entry level stuff. It should still produce better photos than she has in her portfolio and on Facebook. I think you are correct, it would help if she got a decent speedlight or two and learned how to use all her gear.
April 3, 2014 at 7:46 pm #18097ParticipantDoesn’t the red lights indicate a train approaching??
Holy over exposure!!
Not to mention also that this wonderful faux has been featured on photostealers about a month ago. :/
April 3, 2014 at 8:41 pm #18101April 4, 2014 at 8:17 am #18112Worst Case Scenario
ParticipantDoesn’t the red lights indicate a train approaching??
Looking at the bad cut out of the dress, the harsh shadow of her neck and the lack of shadow from the signal pole…….. I’m guessing she’s quite safe.
April 4, 2014 at 12:41 pm #18118ParticipantThe 35-80 was the kit lens with entry level canon SLRs (note the lack of a D). It was later replaced with the 28-80 and 28-90 versions with the same uninspiring apertures.
I have an old 28-80 lens that came with my EOS 300V when I bought it in 2003. Combined weight of camera, lens, battery and film is next to nothing, my compact feels heavier. It even has a poopup flash, in fact the body was so similar that when I got my first DSLR a 350D there was essentially no difference other than the LCD on the back and it used CF instead of Kodak. Image quality was however about the same comparing the 8mpix digital with its iffy kit lens and the 35mm with its iffy kit lens and decent film. There was however a bit more je ne sais quoi which I suspect is due to the longer lens and shorter depth of field at similar apertures. Sadly there is no way of getting around that a 55mm lens is always only 55 no matter how small the sensor is. If I could have a similarly sized FF camera now with a similar sized lens for that kind of weight I’d be all over it.
April 9, 2014 at 8:13 pm #18215Peterography
ParticipantWell, let me add to the list.
http://www.losangelesweddingpro.com/
He advertises on Craigslist and includes with his wedding sessions a “13×19 digital painting dry mounted on foam core and brush stroked with acrylic and double matted for framing”
April 9, 2014 at 9:06 pm #18218Rise Against Fauxtogs
ParticipantOh my gosh, I just don’t know what I saw just now.
What is the meaning of this: http://www.losangelesweddingpro.com/Portraits/i-RLKfj6p/A
April 9, 2014 at 10:13 pm #18219seth
ParticipantHe looks like one of those that was a hit when film was booming but just can’t find his way in the digital world.
April 10, 2014 at 1:28 am #18221fautox1977
ParticipantHe looks like one of those that was a hit when film was booming but just can’t find his way in the digital world.
Film or Digital, that is just bad photography. Full Auto Mode with straight flash and inability to focus correctly. On top of that you have really bad post processing. I have a niece that is 10 and can compose better photos. I even take her with me as a second shooter (for fun…) and use a couple of her photos in the albums.
April 10, 2014 at 5:36 am #18224Shaugn1
ParticipantSo someone on a local mom’s group page put up the old “need a photographer, last minute, cheap…” and the fauxtogs came out of the woodworks. It is truly amazing how many stay at home moms in my area have decided to become “photographers” overnight. Here is a few of my favorites-
Because nothing says “fauxtog” like two baby monkeys in a giant flower. Only some selective coloring could have made this photo worse.
She may have done a little retouching here…
PLANKING BABY!
And then there is this gem…
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Sheena-Lea-Photography/286595718100600
60 dollars for how many pictures? All? How many is that?
For 60 dollars she will put tinsel on your child’s head and photography them with her iPhone! Fantastic!
This rabbit is going to give me nightmares.
April 10, 2014 at 5:52 am #18225ParticipantWait wait one more!!! Because this absolutely needed a watermark-
April 10, 2014 at 12:06 pm #18237ParticipantThe great thing is she is booking clients.. before I got into photography I use to think everything with a blurred background was amazing. So I can understand how clients may find her work “appealing”.
Honestly, I am quite jealous and envious 😉
April 10, 2014 at 4:54 pm #18241ParticipantMost of her “clients” appear to be her friends and family. No need to be jealous, I am quite sure she will be no longer in business a year from now.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.