February 21, 2013 at 9:28 pm #7025cmra_grl11Member
Yes, I totally agree See Through Photography is not horrible and has a lot of cute ideas but cute poses and ideas alone is not what makes a good photographer. Learning to edit properly is also just as important as executing the photo properly, and obviously some of her editing is to make up for mistakes made in camera. She needs to learn how to adjust her settings properly to adjust for different light, it is obvious she does not really know how the run her camera. The hazy/grainy look is completely over done, and harsh shadows on the faces are very unflattering. I agree maybe with some workshops, reading a book or more practice she has potential, however I dont think she is ready to shoot weddings or newborns or really charge for that matter until she perfects her craft more.February 21, 2013 at 9:56 pm #7026
But remember too, there are plenty of good photographers who are not good at posing. When I started out, I was good with technical side, but hadn’t perfected posing. I’m still not perfect but I study up a lot on it, look at others’ work for inspiration and ideas, etc. and I know I can pose people better now than I used to.February 22, 2013 at 11:40 am #7040February 22, 2013 at 11:53 am #7041February 22, 2013 at 11:54 am #7042cmra_grl11Member
Still no matter how good the pose is I would not pay to end up looking yellow, green or hazy in my photos where you cant make out much detail.February 22, 2013 at 12:01 pm #7045February 22, 2013 at 12:04 pm #7046
It looks more like she’s running certain actions at 100% which most actions have some sort of center brightening part to them. Most of her images are in focus and like I said, posed well. A few do look like she overexposed in-camera, but I honestly think she is just going nuts with the editing.February 22, 2013 at 12:12 pm #7047February 22, 2013 at 12:21 pm #7048
I use actions, they add a little oomph to the photos, and some actions just make the workflow a little quicker. I certainly don’t use them at 100% ever. Even though they are premade, I use them individually on each photo. I always offer clean edits to the clients and my clean edits typically have had a few actions used on them. Additionally, as you probably have seen from my photostream, I give some “artsy” edits, which have more of an action applied. Some of those vintage or creamy black-and-white ones were actions. Personally, those are not the kind of photos I’d put on my own wall, but people love them for their online albums. So I do both.February 22, 2013 at 12:32 pm #7049February 22, 2013 at 12:46 pm #7050FauxRealzMember
Okay, so here’s my first (and probably last) post on this site. I’ve read through almost every discussion on the site, and while you do make some good points here and there, mostly you just sound really bitchy and catty. That’s okay with me, everyone is entitled to an opinion, and it’s not rocket science to build a WordPress site these days, so I’m not faulting anyone for creating it, but could you be less consistant?? I think not. Sometimes you trash-talk a photographer for having a few blurry or “bad” images, while others get defended with terms like “she has potential” or “only a few bad ones”. This forum is obiously not objective or very proffessional with many of the comments, but hey, whatever. My bigger point, and the one that I REALLY REALLY hope you have a good answer for is this: Several times people have been called out for using images that are not their own, and rightfully so. So… what about the photos on your front page? Do you have permission to use them? Do you believe that cutting out or painting over their watermark makes it okay? I just want to see the explanation as to why it’s okay for you to steal from others for your main page and then trash people for stealing. Should be a good load of BS!
If you’re wondering, yes, a friend of mine was mentioned in this discussion, and yes, the pics pointed out were not great, and I convinced her to take some down, because they were not the best. I think the problem with most of the albums you trash-talk is that they post even their not-so-great ones. My friend took down 3 pics. 3. She has over 200 other pics that are just fine. Just sayin. If any of the pics on the front page are being used without permission, I would advise you to take them down or obtain written permission from the photographer who took them. (I don’t use your term Fauxtographer because if you take a picture, and you get paid for it, you’re a photographer, no matter how bad the pic might be. Sorry to burst your bubble.) If anyone reading this has a picture on the front page of YANAP and did not give permission to the site, then you may have legal rights to sue, and I suggest you do so! Thanks for reading!February 22, 2013 at 1:01 pm #7051
Not exactly sure who you are directing your rant towards, if anyone, in specific. None of us on the forums are actually affiliated with the website, other than we comment and participate in the forums. There have been photos taken down from the main page after the photographer requested they do so. Does that make it right to post in the first place? No, not really. Another FB page popped up last week (someone had linked it here) where they were clicking the “share” button. No copyright infringement was taking place by doing so, but people go so worked up. If a photographer has several albums of horrible photos, it’s a poor representation of their work. Maybe those albums were from years ago. But it would benefit them greatly to just take down or hide those particular albums, if they don’t want potential clients to judge their work poorly. Most of us here are using these forums to gain advice and constructive criticism actually, and it does help. The bad examples are showing what NOT to do, and most are pretty clear-cut. We also like to defend our art. If you were a hairdresser, went to school for cosmetology, and started from the bottom up learning the right way to do it and maybe worked for another salon before opening up your own salon, then some girl you went to high school with who was lazy decided to go buy a pretty pair of scissors and start advertising all over the internet that she gave haircuts and dye jobs for $5, I think you’d be pretty pissed too.February 22, 2013 at 1:12 pm #7052
By the way, here are the examples of my friend’s engagement photos. The first one is the hired photog, the second is my re-edit. They were jpg images and most weren’t in great focus. I really liked the first image, but wasn’t so crazy about the second. The password is “test123” http://roxie1303.smugmug.com/CLIENTLOGIN/Test/28127991_ZgzvXm#!i=2377191981&k=5MknX8Q
The shallow DOF of the first one by the tree works really well. It was shot at f/2.8, 155mm. The couple was way underexposed, and there were funky green casts on their skin. I edited it to give true representation of their skin tones, remove some blemishes, and bring up the exposure mostly on the right side.
The second image was shot at f/8.0 and 28mm. I did not like the angle this was shot at, nor the long depth of field. It just doesn’t work for this image. The background is a bit distracting, especially with the horizon at such an angle. I straightened it a little but didn’t have much room to work with. There were harsh shadows and shiny spots on his face. I tried to minimize these. I know I didn’t achieve the best look on the skin, but these images were shot in bright, direct sunlight. This particular area is the same place I shot some engagement photos at (I didn’t even realize that at the time I did it!) but there are a lot of shaded areas available there.
Most of the other photos I would have considered unusable due to extreme dark shadows on their faces. There were horses behind one of the fences and the bride-to-be wanted them in the background. They did get a couple of photos with them, but in the one she liked the best, there was a huge pile of horse &*$% right behind them and super noticeable! She used that photo for her save-the-dates! She did a botched attempt at cloning it out, but in the end I convinced her to put the text over that area because it just was no good. She really wanted that particular photo for the save-the-dates.February 22, 2013 at 1:12 pm #7053FauxFightersMember
I think the issue is that with everything, nobody is going to totally agree on who should and should not be on here. Some people have an axe to grind against certain individuals or competitors and may be overly critical of them. Others are trying to down everybody. I usually try to call out the truly bad fauxtogs and point out shots from all over their portfolio (not just two shots from a single shoot), but I also try to defend folks that are doing pretty good work and may have made a questionable decision on posting a couple of shots posted by others. Hence why its going to be hit or miss as to who gets posted, “trashed”, etc. I have not approached posting on here as ax grinding. I like seeing what others are doing and how it can encourage me to do better.
As to the front page, I hate to tell you, but the difference between posting them on here and people STEALING others work and misrepresenting it as their own on their website/page is totally different. I do not know the legal implications of simply reposting a shot on the front page, but nobody on YANAP is claiming that the shots are theirs. Additionally those of us in this forum (who AFAIK aren’t any of the admins of the site) are merely pointing to photos posted publicly on FB or whatever site they are posted on and critiquing them. I think some of the folks are unnecessarily mean, but if you post a photo for the world to see, you better be prepared to accept the criticism, just like any other artistic medium. If you are worried about getting your feelings hurt, then this probably isn’t the right thing to be in.February 22, 2013 at 1:26 pm #7055FauxRealzMember
The post was directed at whomever runs this site, as well as the people who post a LOT in the discussion boards, like browneyedgirl89. (you sure post a lot for someone not affiliated with the site, maybe you should be going to networking meetings instead, to get more customers, so that you can graduate to “pro” and make a living off photography.) I’m glad that at least you recognize that it’s not right to use someone’s work without permission. Posting a link to something is fine, because the photographer can hide or delete the picture whenever they want, but putting it on the front page of a site is not the same thing. I agree with you about putting only your best work up on the internet for the world to see, and a lot of folks don’t do enough self-censoring. I’ve been in business as an LLC for over a year now, working out of my home (not in photography) and I understand that you might be “pissed” that someone else is charging too much or putting out low-quality work, but when your work is great and you get that reputation for being an expert, you have no need to trash the compitition; your work speaks for itself. Capitalism is based on the idea that if you suck at your business, customers will learn and move on to someone who does it better. I get customers all the time who went to __________ last time, but I fix their stuff cheaper and better, and now they are my customers for life. I don’t have to put down the competition, I just have to keep getting better at my “art” of repairing and building computers.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.