January 27, 2013 at 12:03 am #5990EnticeMember
This guy does my head in.. lol
This guy needs to be show how not to photograph..January 27, 2013 at 2:10 am #5991CraigMyranMember
Twelve years of experience??!!! http://www.facebook.com/pages/You-Nique-Photo/219258934869306?sk=info
Here’s a sample of my three year progress (a quarter of the aforementioned “artist”):January 27, 2013 at 3:54 pm #5994fstopper89Member
@Craig, that Amie girl’s photos are all snapshots that look to be taken with a phone, no joke! She has been advertising on a local buy/sell page. She recently started a “contest” where if you send people to her page and they “like” the page, whomever sends the most referrals gets a free photo session. It’s the dumbest way to get fake likes and all the fauxtogs seem to do it!
And You Nique Photo… horrible! And they have these ads for their boudoir sessions that clearly are using someone else’s image of women for the example.
@Entice, the links to the two middle photos no longer work. Either you have to be their friend to see it or the person took down the photos. And that children’s photoshoot link, omg, prime example of how you can be shooting with top-notch equipment (as they posted that they used a 5D Mark III) and still produce utter crap!January 27, 2013 at 4:53 pm #5995CraigMyranMember
The Mark III happens to be the camera I’m looking at getting. I’m shooting right now with a 1000D.January 27, 2013 at 11:01 pm #6002
The Dynamic Mobile Photography one confuses me. Some things are really pretty interesting (found myself turning pages and looking around), other stuff is junk. You almost wonder if they have multiple personality disorder and sometimes the hack takes over at bad moments.
You Nique is definitely sad…
What do you guys think of this?January 27, 2013 at 11:02 pm #6003
And most of this album made me feel sorry for the bride and groom:January 28, 2013 at 2:52 am #6004Punk28Member
Quoted from facebook page…
“From today till the 7th of February 2013 we will be running a magnificent special for the upcoming valentines day. R300 ($30 US) gets you an hour and a half shoot, plus all original photos on disc as well as 30 edited.”
Think it’s worth $10 an hour?January 28, 2013 at 8:04 am #6005
@Punk28 – did you notice that there are some better shots on that page but that they are all watermarked “Cristallo Fenestre Photography” instead of the unwatermarked photos the rest of the page? It is just the one shoot. The post production techniques, etc., everything has a different feel. There’s one image there that’s not in focus, but most of them seem better than the rest of the page. I just find that fascinating… Hmmm…?January 28, 2013 at 7:13 pm #6016andyhalMember
I ran across this today. Ugh.January 28, 2013 at 7:34 pm #6018shhhitsasecretMember
“I have been in photography for over 25 years but only recently took my business more public.”
25 years?? Doubtful!January 28, 2013 at 8:06 pm #6019S.G.C.Member
Definitely THIS http://www.facebook.com/MirekOndracekAgentmirasPhotography
Poor girl 🙁 http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=539190206100761&set=o.411555265591625&type=3&theaterJanuary 28, 2013 at 9:57 pm #6023fstopper89Member
So You Nique Photo had this image that completely looked like it was a stock image or stolen from another site that they used advertising their boudoir session. It was a very nice shot of a woman done in a studio with perfect lighting and smooth skin. It clearly was not one they shot, considering the quality of their other photos. I sent them a private message asking if that was an image they shot and that I was wondering because it appeared inconsistent with their other images, and that as a photographer myself, I know that’s false advertising and copyright infringement and they could get into legal trouble. Well they did not reply, but they removed the photo. So apparently I was right. They still have another boudoir advetisement up with a very small photo that probably isn’t theirs either, but whatever. I mean come on! If you’re going to advertise a portrait session, use your own images!January 28, 2013 at 11:50 pm #6033
Good to know, Browneyedgirl – I don’t have the willingness to be that confrontational. A beginning photographer who opened their own studio recently came onto my radar and I suggested we could help each other with opinions about each other’s work. Hopefully I can get her to tone down Barbie faces with glittering blue eyes a bit. 🙁
I can’t figure out why someone wouldn’t use their own images – do they think the customer isn’t going to say, “Hey, why didn’t you do the black velvet and rose petals for me? How come the lighting from your window didn’t do as good a job as this picture here?” etc.?January 28, 2013 at 11:52 pm #6034
You know it’s a bad thing when they keep resorting to black and white to get rid of the magenta-tinged faces. Why does it seem so common, though?January 28, 2013 at 11:56 pm #6035
That comment was too snarky – possibly TRUE, but too snarky, so I’ll just get rid of it.
No one gets a DSLR for Christmas and immediately becomes a pro photographer. That would be just silly.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.