Home Forums Am I a Fauxtog? Feel free to turn your critical eye my way

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 90 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #15020
    OldClicks
    Member

    CC – you obviously get that there is more to successful commercial photography than making every image a perfect representation of the ideal, and you made an excellent point with Sandy Tam. Pretty sure that I’ll stick around as long as there is more to learn.

    #15026
    emf
    Member

    there is more to successful commercial photography than making every image a perfect representation of the ideal

    I’m not saying it should be – but photography (of any kind, be it fine art or commercial) is a visual language and to communicate that language effectively you need to understand and successfully utilise the visual formal elements and principles of composition.

    #15028

    The Facebook page is a marketing tool – images with a purpose, not my “best work”.

     

    Like I said, at least 15 years behind the times.

    #15032
    OldClicks
    Member

    WCS – Is there an echo in here? Please explain your duplicate comment, and what the current school of thought it for successfully marketing your work. You’re obviously very successful as a photographer, correct? And I’m sure you’ll provide a link to your site, right? Perhaps you’re one of those photographers so caught up in technology, you are missing the bigger picture. HDR is something we used to do with a split neutral density filter, but now anyone with a digital camera and computer can recreate. Mastering that may give you a great sense of accomplishment, but that doesn’t mean your portrait clients are going to ask for it.

    I’ll meet you halfway, and rephrase my comment. The Facebook page is a marketing tool – images with a purpose, not necessarily my “best work”. But it’s all I have right now, other than some large prints, which are not current. Getting paid for my work is easy enough, but I’m here because I want to improve my product. Do you have anything to offer in that respect?

     

    #15044
    Sassy
    Member

    i have read most of the posts but not all. i think you have been given some good critique but it almost feels like you dont want to hear it at all.

    I honestly wouldn’t pay for any of the photos on your FB site.

    https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=638583266185711&set=pb.591852427525462.-2207520000.1384049704.&type=3&theater

    Cute kid but horrid digital back drop border and very soft focus, let me guess mum loved it? well mum has mummy goggles on so don’t believe her. Its fun to play with digital stuff but chucking a digital border on a shot does not a good image make.

    https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=618645958179442&set=pb.591852427525462.-2207520000.1384049704.&type=3&theater

    who wants to buy dirty shoes? why are they on your site?

    https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=613785638665474&set=pb.591852427525462.-2207520000.1384049709.&type=3&theater

    this is such an easy shot to get, for me focus should be on mario and peaches and not on the grass. why is some cake chopped off? its an odd composition.

    https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=613785435332161&set=pb.591852427525462.-2207520000.1384049709.&type=3&theater

    this is blown and is such an easy fix in PP. also an odd composition, it doesnt  make me want to eat the cake.

    Most of your photos have major technical issues. I am certainly no expert but even i can spot them.

    I agree with others, you should only put your best images out there for people to see.

    https://www.facebook.com/SarahsPics As you are so desperate to see others work, this is me. I am not great and yes i have technical issues but i’m getting help and i’m nutting them out, unlike you i have only really been shooting 18 months. You have reminded me its time to go through and delete some of my earlier work.

     

    #15052
    OldClicks
    Member

    Sassy, thank you for your comments. I think I have been very receptive to valid criticisms, and I wouldn’t have put my photos out there if I didn’t want to hear it. It’s quite clear that no one on here likes the graphics. I get that. I’m pretty sure one of them was used on the invitation to her 1st birthday party, so it served its purpose. The shoes were done as part of a review. It’s interesting that when I shoot them out of the box, someone will invariably comment that it adds credibility to see them all dirty, yet here I shoot a pair that have been worn, I get the opposite. You’re spot on about the cake – one image was never intended to be uploaded (which is why I just deleted it), and I hadn’t realized how soft the other looked.

    I’m certainly not desperate to look at other photographer’s work, but feel it’s fair to ask that if you are critiquing my images, you provide some samples of your own. I did have a look at yours, and they’re nice. You’ve chosen an excellent niche too. Not to take away from your talent, but I’m sure the Baby Bonus and Parenting Payments make it more commercially viable. Do you think they contribute to your success?

    #15053
    Sassy
    Member

    Thank you for your compliment. Newborn photography is ‘in fashion’ at the moment which helps, but i wouldn’t call what i have a successful business, i have had a few paid gigs but i only take on maximum 1-2 paid jobs a month, the only reason i do it is to pay for more gear and public liability insurance because it has been a dream of mine to become a Heart Felt volunteer photography (im a NICU nurse as my trade). I doubt very much the baby bonus and parenting scheme has helped this niche, as it is the baby bonus is gone pretty much and the paid parental is over installments and only  eligible if you worked X amount of the year ect ect. i Think the real reason why newborn portraiture is popular is because of mummy goggles, all new mums want to brag about their baby and see how beautiful their baby is (i know cause i’m a mum!).

     

    I think Wedding photography would have a wealthier customer base (2 wages and lack of kids) but probably harder work on the day (not that newborns are easy)

    #15054

    @ OldClicks

    this is a 43 image brenizer stich . Something you wouldn’t know anything about , since you dont really ” Photoshop ”

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/rpgvalentine/10505498963/

     

    as for the security camera shot , That can be easily fixed in PHOTOSHOP   lol   . As for your FautogNess , no amount of gear or PHOTOSHOP can fix that .

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/rpgvalentine/10505350744/

    Plain and simple , your work blows donkey dick .

    https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=638583266185711&set=pb.591852427525462.-2207520000.1384049704.&type=3&theater

    #15056
    OldClicks
    Member

    Baby photography will always be in fashion. My wife loves babies (her daughter is in her teens, my son just graduated from college), and keeps hinting that we should do more baby photos, just so she can be around them. But I like interacting with my clients a bit more. Good on you for following your passion.

    When I moved to Newcastle, I spoke with someone at a small photography school there, and he told me that shooting weddings in Australia was just brutal work, as they are all day affairs, and the competition is cutthroat. Equipment is also much more expensive. One of my friends offered me his $900 bicycle in exchange for a Canon strobe unit. Your wage structure is better (I think minimum wage in the US is around $7/hr), but it certainly takes more of a commitment when investing in equipment there.

    #15057
    OldClicks
    Member

    @RPG – so you’re saying that you took 43 separate images to make one, yet never noticed the distracting mess in the foreground, the out of focus branch in the upper left of the frame, the missing top to that umbrella or whatever it is, and the annoying white spot next to the subjects head? And you can barely see their faces! You may have a decent grasp of Photoshop, but your actual photo skills need some work too. Pot, meet kettle. Of course, your client probably loved the final result, after you explained how much post production time you spent  on it. Even though no one would know it’s her.

    I’m well aware that the security camera can easily be fixed in Photoshop. I’m just surprised that an expert photographer such as yourself didn’t even consider it until someone as untalented as myself pointed it out. That must have hurt your pride a bit. The fact that you think gear and software are a substitute for actual skill or talent says a lot too. Until you grow up a bit, my comment is still valid – you’re just a douchebag with a camera.

    #15059

    I don’t recall this thread being titled “Feel free to turn your critical eye my way – as long as I can see your work and give critique even if you didn’t ask for it”

    How ever  I can see you’re just not getting it, so here goes.

    I’m 50 years old and I’ve worked in photography  all my life. I’ve run my own business for over 30 years. I probably know more about working with film than you, but unlike you, I embraced digital a long time before digital cameras were available. I ran a pro lab until about about 1999 and spent my time in darkrooms  sorting out colour for people like you.

    I now run a high street studio in the UK, I stay anonymous here because I’ve used this site to display the work of my competitors. I have several websites and pages on social media sites where I display ONLY MY BEST WORK. The only reason to display substandard work – is because you don’t have anything better.

    You’re not the first person to ask to see my work, but anyone with a computer can track back an image to it’s author if it’s been used on a website. So I set up a flickr account and posted some images that I liked, but for one reason or another have never been posted. You can check it out herehttp://www.flickr.com/photos/101923681@N02/

    I’m sure you’ll want to pull each picture apart, go ahead.

    Everyone here knows you are a faux, and every time you post you show how far behind the times you are.

    ” that brenizer shot is all out of focus in the foreground”  *facepalm*

    #15065
    Gerbles
    Member

    I guess I’m not  understanding why you don’t think of your facebook business page as your portfolio. Is it not a body of work presented to potential clients? Sure, you may have a printed portfolio, but this is not what most people will see, as most marketing is done online these days (as you said- your page is for marketing purposes.). Therefore, I would prune your fb page back and get rid of about 95% of what you have presented. They aren’t very good- for a variety of reasons that have already been mentioned- bad/unflattering posing, bad lighting, dated studio backgrounds, lack of creativity, among others. And as for just striving to be a bit better than your competition, that sounds like you’re setting your sites pretty low. As of right now, I would suggest not charging at all and just shoot for the joy of shooting (and learn along the way- yes, even if you have decades of experience- which isn’t evident in your work)

    And my qualifications for critiquing your work- hobbiest, about 4 years experience, never have made a dime with any of my work, and don’t plan to for quite some time, if ever. And if you think that discounts my suggestions, that’s completely fine.

    #15067

    This is a pretty cool 35 minutes:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lw39RecMxKo

    I use that method for some macro photos, except the goal is to get everything into focus, so focus changes for every exposure and stitching is a pain.  I also tried it in Victoria Harbour with limited success.  It never occurred to me to ask people to stand still long enough to use it for a portrait!

    There is a lot more in the video than just the method.  I like that most of his wedding customers don’t care that much that he photographed presidents and the Pope, they want to know if his wedding photos are any good.  I also like the comment that you have to come up with your 500 best shots of the wedding!

    As far as I can tell, object of the Brenizer Method is to make a portrait taken with an SLR look like it was taken with medium format.  It is more an application of a method than a method, as the method has been around for a long time.  This is a pretty cool photo using an extreme version of the method:

    http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/gigapixel.htm

    Anyway, regarding:

    this is a 43 image brenizer stich . Something you wouldn’t know anything about , since you dont really ” Photoshop ”

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/rpgvalentine/10505498963/

     

    the point is that no one really cares how the photo was made unless they are trying to recreate it. What most people care about is, is it any good?  The tilt, chopped off top, bright blobs in the foreground all detract.

    But, thank you for bringing Brenizer to my attention, he has some beautiful photos.

    #15068
    IHF
    Member

    This is what bothers me most. You say, “I’m at an age where my job affords me the luxury of pursuing hobbies, so I can take photos because I enjoy photography, not because I need to make money. Yes, I may charge people as I see fit, but I could just as easily work for free”.

    Yet, your arguments defending your work are all business/money related.
    While you are much more intelligent, (or should I say more knowledgable) than most fauxs that we run into here. You are saying the very same things they do, just worded a little differently, and not driven solely by emotion.

    They say “It’s not about the money” and then contradict themselves by saying “my clients are happy that’s all that matters. I put all my shots up because it’s what the client wants and how I find new clients that like my work. I’m not competing with you, or trying to please other photographers. This is more of a hobby, than anything else. I just enjoy it. My area is low income, and/or people seem to be happy with anything better than a cell shot. You wouldn’t believe the amount of photographers in my area that are way worse than I am. All of my clients have been happy to pay, but I’d gladly do it for free”.

    In essence, they unknowingly talk about their demographics, and defend their work by using business as their defense, yet they had already stated that it wasn’t about the money to be made, and that their finances afford them to not be profitable at the moment. You just do the same, but with more knowledge behind what you say.

    Not for money, and not to try to become the best photographer you can be, or to spend your free time studying light, because photography is just in your blood. Then why? If your work says “light?! Shmight! As long as my client can see the subject, and they love the person/people in the images, I’m good to go!” And you solicit your services to the public. Then, that tells me it’s more about finding a way to make money off of people who don’t really know any better. In business taking advantage of other people’s emotions and love for one another selling them sub par products/services. Potentially a fun hobby I guess, judging by how many do just that. Just not something I’m very interested in.

    #15070
    IHF
    Member

    And although I find my work completely irrelevant to the subject at hand, and in no way will it change any of the criticism you have received here or make your images any better, I will go ahead jump on board and link to my POD site

    http://www.redbubble.com/people/onegoodeye/portfolio

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 90 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.