August 14, 2013 at 1:26 pm #11926August 14, 2013 at 4:12 pm #11928August 14, 2013 at 10:28 pm #11933alexandraParticipant
And here I thought eyes were an important feature to look out for when shooting a portrait… not to mention good white balance and focus…
Oh, and ew! With the “blown away” one, I’m pretty sure I know another fauxtog who abuses the same set of photoshop actions with the bright, vibrant greens and blues, and a weird way of “fixing” certain areas of the image that are over, or under-exposed. To be honest, I don’t know much about actions, and I never used them, but when something looks this unnaturally horrid, you can definitely tell…
And here are some of my “favourite” shots from said photographer…
Desaturated skin baby:
Cool sky that seems 100% legit:
Skin tones so flat, there is no room for unwanted imperfections such as eyebrows, and hair:
I’m sure the library loves to see their books being used like this:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=318991844890932&set=pb.201383103318474.-2207520000.1376533623.&type=3&theaterAugust 15, 2013 at 1:27 am #11936emfParticipant
What is it with these names? Roulette Exposure and now Blown Away?! Is this some kind of sub conscious admission they can’t get the right exposure?August 15, 2013 at 12:46 pm #11937youaintallthatParticipant
This literally took my breath away:August 15, 2013 at 1:24 pm #11938
that baby on the book may be single-handedly the worst child photo I have ever seen.August 16, 2013 at 10:18 am #11963Worst Case ScenarioParticipant
When I saw this I immediately thought “they are looking at the REAL photographer” even though no real photographer would shoot a group against that wall
but then later on I found these. Click here and then view the next shot in the series as well.
I’m assuming that after doing all that work to badly remove the photographer see couldn’t be bothered to do it all again for the black and white version!!!August 16, 2013 at 11:50 am #11970sethParticipant
Just bwahahaha! That is awesome!!August 16, 2013 at 1:30 pm #11975
Was she maybe the 2nd shooter? I literally only saw 3 ofmher photos, no time to look further, but she’s not totally horrible. She might have tagged along as a learning experience. That cloning is bad though.August 16, 2013 at 5:31 pm #11980SilverParticipant
I dunno.. . .seriously???August 16, 2013 at 6:03 pm #11985
wow is this shag carpet on the wall? Its sooo noisy…August 16, 2013 at 6:30 pm #11988BoomerParticipant
I have to share a couple from a local fauxtog…. The first I assume was an attempt at creating a glamorous portrait… The second is just toxic.August 16, 2013 at 9:06 pm #11989
Oh my those are pretty bad, Boomer. Wow!August 16, 2013 at 11:58 pm #11996iliketagParticipant
The ones Silver shared are pretty bad. I really loathe the diffuse glow-barbie skin. *shudder*August 18, 2013 at 6:20 pm #12043
Jessi-Lee has some pretty bad photos, mixed with some good photos, mixed with some good photos that were ruined by over-editing. She has a lot of over-softened skin. I think she has potential but I wouldn’t hire her. However, then I came across this one: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=143810282419677&set=pb.142618515872187.-2207520000.1376864247.&type=3&theater I honestly have no idea what she was trying to achieve here by ghosting a baby’s face onto a potato.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.