Fauxtogs who should end up on the main page…

[FauxFighters]

Alright, enough about the horseshit with Roxanne.  I am going to post on the topic of the thread!  I got recommended the link to this photographer via Facebook yesterday.  She had a sponsored FB ad and a very extended family member liked this page.  I was originally asked to shoot the wedding for this extended family member, but already had a conflict that weekend, so this person shot it instead.  I will say this person is not as absolutely terrible as Cathleen, but I still think she qualifies.  So I present:

https://www.facebook.com/photobykeri

Now to start off with, the first thing that really annoys me about this lady is her attempt to lure other Christians in by blanketing her FB and webpage with Bible quotes.  I am a Christian who attends church regularly and hope I am a good example to others, but I feel that covering your business webpage with this is distracting and oftentimes disingenuous.  Just because my page isn’t covered with Bible quotes and mentions of God doesn’t mean that I would be unprofessional in thoughts, actions or pricing, or that you are somehow a better photographer than somebody else.  Anyways, that is a personal rant, not anything business related, but I feel it could alienate people who have different beliefs than you or just simply distract from the important part of getting quality photographs that capture an important moment for your client.

So my first find was her wonderful marketing for a Family Stoll?

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151017373841600

Good job not proofreading. Here is another one showing off her awesome Photoshop editing skills while “marketing”:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151317612666600

This folder is “The Beauty of Christ”.  It seems to me to be more reasonable to just name it “Some random snapshots I took out the window of my car and put a huge watermark on” as that is all they appear to be to me:

http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10151464540416600.515306.195884881599

There is nothing that interests me in any of those shots.  Many are blown out badly in spots or extremely dark.  No interesting subjects or anything that makes those shots impress me.  Next is her “Portfolio”

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151384685201600

Looks like the front of the wagon is the only thing in focus.  The little girl certainly is not.

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151384685136600

I think the focal point is on the tin roof, not the little girl on the tractor.

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151384685221600

No consideration for the direct sunlight shining on half her face.

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151384710811600

Automatic white balance for the lose (I’m guessing?) and the girl is out of focus.

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151448520921600

Not sure whats up with this weird pose/angle on the baby, but wow.

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151448520626600

Not sure why she posted a picture to her “portfolio” that a baby is grabbing her camera strap.

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150200192036600

A fauxtog self-portrait, with a base camera and kit lens.  No surprises here, judging by the quality of her work.

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151196882806600

Unsure where the focal point is supposed to be on this shot because they have vignetted half the kid dark, yet most of the shot is out of focus.

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150263119451600

Another marketing piece.  I guess she has (wisely) deleted some of her old photos, but the photo in the top right hand side shows a bride hidden in the shade with a camera that has obviously metered for the brightly lit sky behind instead.

This following photo is my favorite, but this one is from her personal page, not the biz page.  She was apparently “ripped off” by another fauxtographer.  Seems she gave the person who got this photo full rights without a clause saying “Full use, except commercial”.  Therefore this other person posted her photo up as her own, and since there was no watermark branding on the photo and the lady has the CD with “full rights” to use it, I guess she does.  Gotta pay attention to those things fauxtogs and newbies alike.

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=4947934252027

Thankfully because of that little tidbit, I might have another fauxtog to share!

[JLiu]

FauxFighters – thank you for bringing this thread back  on topic.

[fstopper89]

Yikes, those are pretty bad. I saw 1-2 portraits that looked decent in posing and exposure, but weren’t in focus.

I agree with the Christian marketing theme. When you mix religion into business, it can and does often turn away potential clients. Nothing wrong with posting photos of a family with cross necklaces, or photos taken in a church, or anything like that. On her page it overpowers the actual theme of her business. There’s a photographer near me, who’s actually quite good, but he ONLY does portraits for people he goes to church with. I think it only hurts marketing.

[FauxFighters]

Double header.  Another fauxtog!  This one has over 1,400 likes, which really surprises me.  So without further ado, I present Sara Lassiter Photography:

http://www.facebook.com/saralassiterphotography1

Here is one from her most recent session.  This shot is totally out of focus:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=524338030944145

Apparently having issues with focus runs throughout her shots.  Here is a series of shots from the same engagement session where focus is usually on something in the background, or none at all:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=491048400939775

He asked, but I can barely read it, because its so blurry and blown out:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=495716313806317

Thank God that sewer line is in focus in this shot:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=495716640472951

I think they are looking at the camera, but again we are focused on something else entirely:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=495716683806280

Blurry:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=474302469281035

Blurrier:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=474302482614367

Looks like he’s throwing the blurry blob:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=474303185947630

Serious issues with focusing on the subject, again:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=470288713015744

Shooting in a field in direct sunlight with no fill flash or reflectors doesn’t end well:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=470401806337768

Another session, with about half of the posted photos blurry and out of focus:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=467472066630742

Ditto:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=459822850728997

All I want for Christmas is some in-focus subjects:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=486392791405336

The pixelated and severely backlit bride is strolling down the aisle:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=199689980075620

I think you get the idea.  Definitely needs to work on the technical side of her camera and learn how to get the camera to focus on the subject.

[fstopper89]

I clicked on her page, and she has some good work. There were some very sharp, well-exposed, cute newborn photos done in a studio… and then lots of stuff out of focus like you’ve posted. She has some nice poses but severely is lacking in technical knowledge. I hope not all of her photos are so out-of-focus like those. It seems as if she could be using auto-focus and not selecting a point and just hoping the camera gets it right… you just cannot rely on that.

[JLiu]

Mmm…gonna have to delete the previous post….wasn’t aware that the site I was supposed to “like” is actually my friend’s wife.  Yikes…I’ll need to talk to her.

[seth]

I agree with the Christian marketing theme. When you mix religion into business, it can and does often turn away potential clients. Nothing wrong with posting photos of a family with cross necklaces, or photos taken in a church, or anything like that. On her page it overpowers the actual theme of her business. There’s a photographer near me, who’s actually quite good, but he ONLY does portraits for people he goes to church with. I think it only hurts marketing.

It just depends.   Sometimes that GETS you business.  Depends in the way it’s handled.  But maybe that’s all that guy has time for or maybe he just does it for them basically as a favor, doesn’t want a business.  It only hurts his marketing if he’s saying, “Come use me! Oh wait, need to join my church first.”

[fstopper89]

That’s true, but I believe he does charge (thought I could be wrong).

[seth]

Sorry, I meant the availability of the  service being the favor, not that he doesn’t charge.

[mykelhelene]

I’m religious (though I don’t look like the type) and I honestly cannot stand when people sort of shove it down your throat that they believe in God. It’s always okay to have a random ‘I feel blessed!’ or ‘I give credit of my success to God’, but honestly that kind of stuff even makes religious people uncomfortable. Its just not a good situation. I also dislike when people give credit for all of their accomplishments to God, i’m always like ‘Wait, sure, God might have given you choices, but you chose that path, and you chose that action, so therefore YOU should take credit for that’.

I’m going to give this a whirl.

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Ruby-Tuesday-Imagery/331694283508043?ref=ts&fref=ts

This is a girl I know through a mutual (photographer) friend. My first interaction with her was via facebook, when she was making a status about her camera. She has a Nikon (not familiar with them, but i’m pretty sure it might be the equivalent of the Canon Rebel XTI-T1I) and her statement was “Nikon is the sexy smart brunette of the camera world, Canon is the epitome of a dumb blond slutty girl.” I was sort of floored. I have Canon, but I freaking love Nikon. I also love Canon, and even Pentax. After asking about what she meant I understood from the undertones that she might have just been trying to sound like a ‘cool’ photographer. You know ‘PSH MY CAMERA IS SO MUCH BETTER THAN YOURS BITCH PLEASE’ kinda thing. It was frustrating, but even more frustrating was when I saw her photos. Her explanation for them not being edited was ‘I like photos the way that they’re seen in real life’. I just.. don’t.. understand.

One of my favs;

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=531042503573219&set=pb.331694283508043.-2207520000.1362008957&type=3&theater

 

here’s another, where I actually had to ask WHY?

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=531042293573240&set=pb.331694283508043.-2207520000.1362008957&type=3&theater

 

I think she shoots on auto, but i’m not 100 percent sure.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=531039796906823&set=pb.331694283508043.-2207520000.1362008957&type=3&theater

 

All I know is she is charging, and that I don’t like it.

I definitely wouldn’t say she’s really main page material, but she’s really not ‘good’ at all.

[mykelhelene]

Oh wait I forgot this gem;

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=531039663573503&set=pb.331694283508043.-2207520000.1362008957&type=3&theater

[fstopper89]

Weird, why would someone even write that about the different camera brands? It just makes them sound petty and dumb. From what I’ve read in these forums as well as on other review sites, Canon and Nikon are generally neck-and-neck in quality and performance. There are different advantages of each. I happen to use Canon, it just kind of happened that way, but I don’t look at someone with a Nikon and think “Wow what a loser.”

Photo of an elbow?

I’m sorry, I don’t smoke anything so I might be wrong, but are these blunts in a ziploc? https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=531040786906724&set=pb.331694283508043.-2207520000.1362012023&type=3&theater If so WHY are these on a public business page?

I’ll give it to her that she has some interesting subject matter, but the photographs don’t really make these things come across as interesting at all. Most are out-of-focus or have other technical issues.

@Mykel, off-topic, but I love your hair. I’d never have the guts to do those sorts of colors. My hair color has been the same since birth (except some highlights for a short time) lol.

[mykelhelene]

SERIOUSLY! I have heard that the two companies sort of fall back and forth in the race… But comparing a camera brand to those type of stereotypes is sort of offensive (at least to me). It just reminds me too much of highschool.

YES that is another thing. She just openly photographs herself and friends with paraphanalia. Thankfully for her though it is now legal in Washington (where she lives) but otherwise it wasn’t like she actually pulling clientele, just friends who probably were like ‘hey, i’ll smoke you out if you take pictures of me’. I personally have dabbled in weed but I would never advertise it, especially on my facebook page. The horse show moms would kill me…

Thank you! It’s honestly the most fun I’ve ever had, and it’s very fulfilling. Some people don’t appreciate it but it makes me feel like myself. You should do it! I feel like everyone should at least have a tiny piece of color in their hair at one point in their life. :]

[fstopper89]

It’s legal for recreational use there? I guess I don’t watch the news enough. Even if it is, those photos would deter most potential clients. I doubt if a person looking for family photos or someone looking to get their high school senior’s photos done would even consider hiring them if they saw those photos. One should keep party photos to their own personal page, if they choose to post any. I never did much partying anyway, but I have deleted several photos that could potentially be seen as inappropriate or incriminating from even my personal FB just in case clients or potential employers would see it.

[FauxFighters]

Yea if I was Ruby, I would seriously consider not posting anything incriminating on Facebook.  Especially on your “business” page.  Hate to say it, but employers these days check out everything and background checks now include social media.  On the last couple of hires in my department, our boss did the initial culling of obviously unqualified people, but when he got down to doing phone interviews, he will try and put a face to the picture.  Then once he makes a decision on inviting somebody to do a second interview on location, we are given free reign to scope them out beforehand, and we do.  If she plans to “work for herself” doing photography, this may not be as big a concern (though her ability as it currently stands should) but just like the person who was coating their page with Bible quotes, people make judgement calls based on everything you present.  Clients might smoke or might not, and photographers might as well.  But keep that stuff off the web.  It can and will bite you in the ass someday.

And Mykel, I agree with Roxanne.  I have a lot of friends that have done different hair color before, and a lot of them just look bad with it.  Either makes them look trashy, does not go with their skin-tone, or what.  But you can definitely pull it off and I can imagine photographing you would be really cool.  The contrasting colors with the background, like you in front of the horse, make for some amazing shots.  Very photogenic.

[Author]

Posts