Feel free to turn your critical eye my way

[Rpg Valentine]

@ OldClicks    AKA  ”  FAUXTOGRAPHER”

20+ years doing it right . LMAO

Obviously you’ve been doing it wrong .

You are an example of why this website was created . To expose people like you . I just find it funny how I see so many of you wannabees calling yourself “PRO” when you have no idea what your doing. Regardless of how smart or technical your comments may be  , your work says FAUXTOG all over it . Like I said , you dont have passion for photography. Whats pretty sad , is I have only been doing photography and editing for almost 2 years as a hobby , and you have 20+ . LMAO.

Even my “bad ” photos poop on your best photos

YOU ARE        NOT       A   PHOTOGRAPHER          🙂

[Wilson]

Let me try to help you given that I’m new to this also and haven’t post anything online yet.

Your photos lacks that ‘pop’,  the colors need to stand out more. Maybe post processing will help.

I would like to see more bokeh and less background. What f stop where you using?

I don’t know a thing about shooting weddings but the poses need worked on, looks like they just doing whatever, you being the professional need to control the poses more.

I feel Facebook should be treated like a portfolio and only show your best work not a whole wedding. Maybe a dedicated website with a password for the clients to just view their photos.

The  wedding photos look candid which may be good for the clients but not good if your  trying to get new clients.

I’m sorry but the backdrop with the baby is just UGLY. I don’t know a thing about studio backdrops for babies but I’ll try for a white seamless backdrop but that will mean to learn how to light the background to get it all white which means more flashes and triggers.

It can be worked on but you just got to be willing to learn. I’m trying to learn more everyday but I do know a flash on a light stand with a softbox or umbrella  will give better results than the flash on a bracket. Just my 2 cents

[Wilson]

Nobody is really telling you how to improve  but maybe it was the way you came off earlier..

Photographing is not all about pressing the shutter button. Its….

Iso, shutter speed, aperture, exposure , white balance

lighting, reflecting light, dof, raw (do you use it?), metering, focusing, focus points, composition.

Probably missed more technology stuff

Plus

running a business, working with people, poses, paying attention to detail like the background. the weather and how to work with the sun and shade, getting real smiles vs fake smiles, the location, the clothes, props, getting different angle shots, must have shots, post processing and marketing.

its probably more but my head hurt from thinking. Basically its just a lot to learn.

 

[thewestbackline]

Oldclicks I’m new here but I think you need to get off this idea that only expert photographers can critique your work.  You’re trying to sell your services to non-photographers and trust me, they can tell good professional photography from generic iphone stuff – even if they can’t break it down into exposure, lighting, composition, white balance, etc.  If someone offers an opinion on your photos, it’s valid regardless of whether they’re a pro or not, and regardless of what they themselves are actually capable of producing.  I don’t think you should be posting your stuff asking for C&C if you’re not willing to accept it at face value.

[OldClicks]

Now it’s my turn to sound like a broken record. I can accept constructive criticism. There is nothing constructive about “your work sucks”, or “your work is crap”. When RPG posted and asked for advice, he got plenty of polite and useful feedback. But he seems to be unable to do the same. And for someone so critical, you’d think he’d at least make sure his own images were up to snuff first.

@Wilson – go through my images from the bottom up – you see a couple’s engagement photos, then some bridals, then their wedding. They chose the location for the engagements, I chose the time. I chose the location and time for the bridals. I had no control over either for the wedding. (And we were all up pretty late the night before) In that context, can you see a difference between in quality? Oh, this is the couple that didn’t even want a photographer.

@thewestbackine – I agree with you, to a point. Where I live, I think a lot of people really don’t know what “good” is. And if you want to believe that everyone’s opinion is valid, that’s cool. Some of them are worthless maybe, but still be valid as an opinion. 😉

@cameraclicker – popping an image into focus on a ground glass was always easy. And I could be wrong, but I think the viewfinder in my EOS1N and EOS1V bodies were much brighter than today’s digital cameras. I like to use a focus point on the right, rather than the central one, since I prefer verticals when possible, and that gets the eyes in focus. But I don’t always trust that, and find myself focusing manually out of habit. When I use that point for a central object, then recompose, I think that might affect my plane of focus. I’m seeing this on the images shot with the 17-40 wide open, or close to it. Some time this week, I will test that theory. The fix may be as simple as changing focus points, so I am not rotating the camera a few degrees off axis to focus.

[cameraclicker]

I used the Canon FTb and F1, then a Nikon FM10, switched to digital Nikon bridge cameras, and switched back to Canon with the 30D, 1Ds, 550D and 5D.  Much of my current glass is L lenses, almost all the rest are Sigma lenses.  The cool thing about most digital cameras is the diopter adjustment.  I appreciate that now that I’m older and need reading glasses.   What looks in focus to me, the camera may disagree with and the camera has been proven to be correct.

For most lenses, you can fine tune auto-focus, which is a good thing if the camera/lens is focusing in front or behind where it should be focusing.

Some focus points work with vertical lines, others with horizontal lines and some with both.  It is important to know which points do what, in your viewfinder, for best results.

When I was shooting with the FM10, someone handed me their camera and asked for a photo, that was a long time ago and I forget the make and model but I remember looking through the viewfinder and thinking, “Wow, is this ever bright!”  It was much brighter than my viewfinder.  I should dig out the FM10 and compare it to a 5D Mk III and fast lens.  I’ll try to do that tomorrow.

Some people rotate the camera with their hands, others bend at the waist.  Got a couple of cameras?  Have your wife use one to make a movie of you while recomposing.  It may be enlightening.

[OldClicks]

I’m certain I will find that it’s the focus point and my slight rotation of the camera. And that makes sense, since it’s the images shot with a wide angle, so a few degrees can make a difference when you’re that close. Easy to verify, easy to fix. But I am curious to see your comments once you compare your old camera to the new one.

[nesgran]

What camera are you using? The 1 series have always bigger, better and brighter viewfinders

[Worst Case Scenario]

On your first post you asked –

 Am I out of touch, truly bad, or just a bit rusty?

So my reply that you are 15 years out of date and your pictures are crap was exactly what you asked for. By the time I joined the thread, Valentine had already told you that your pics were “pretty bad” and for being “polite” you tried to rip his work apart, so I don’t think my use of the word crap was unjustified.

When RPG posted and asked for advice, he got plenty of polite and useful feedback.

When RPG posted, he didn’t throw his toys out of the pram because he didn’t like the answers he got, so he got treated politely.

But he seems to be unable to do the same.

He gave you a truthful appraisal of your work, he was under no obligation to give you advice (and now he knows what you are like I’m sure he’s glad he didn’t)

And for someone so critical, you’d think he’d at least make sure his own images were up to snuff first.

Why? Your work is crap, yet you gladly criticise the work of people who didn’t even ask for a critique. BTW I’ve now been far more critical of your work than he has, but I guess you couldn’t find any security cameras on my port.

You wanted me to give you some actual advice that will help your business, so here it is.

Anyone with a DSLR and a flash gun could take the shots that you have on your FB page. So the only way you’ll get any work is by being cheaper than the other Fauxs and being  much, much nicer than they are.

Basically, you’re screwed.

[Intuition]

So because you think that because they don’t know what ‘good photography’ is, you should give them subpar work? And honestly? if you priced correctly and put out brilliant work you wouldn’t get the customers that want 20 dollar photographers. Because as much as you think they don’t know what quality is, they do. Most are caught up in mommy goggles and the assumption that they can’t afford better.

[cameraclicker]

Tests are done.   Both the Canon T2i and 5D Mk III have brighter viewfinders than Nikon’s FM 10.  The FM 10 is, however, smaller and lighter.

I put the 28-135 zoom on the 5D, thinking that would be comparable to what was on the FM 10, but when I dug it out, I discovered it has a 35-70 f/3.5-4.8 lens on it!

The rebel has Sigma’s 18-250 f/3.5-6.3, which I find great for general use.  Their new version is even smaller and lighter

So, anyway. not trusting my eyes, I set up a continuous fluorescent in a softbox at the edge of my desk, placed each camera in turn about the same distance from the softbox and used a Sekonic light meter to measure the light coming through the viewfinder.  I set ISO to 8000 and shutter to 1/20th.  Here are the apertures the light meter suggested:

At the shortest zoom settings

Rebel — 5.0

FM 10 — 5.6

5D — 6.3

At 70 mm, give or take

Rebel — 5.6

FM 10 — 5.0

5D — 5.6

Also, I put a Sigma 85 mm f/1.4 on the 5D, which resulted in a reading of 9.0, so as expected, if you use faster lenses, you get a brighter viewfinder.  Canon’s 24 mm f/1.4 on the 5D scored 8.0

For giggles, I put the Sigma 85 on the Rebel.  To my amazement, it also scored 9.0, so its viewfinder is not too shabby!  Although, it only shows 95% of the scene so things tend to creep into the edges of the frame.

[iliketag]

And just because I can:
I give absolutely no fucks what you think of your own work, OldClicks. You desperately need to stop charging and go back to the basics – relearn them, then hone them and then maybe start taking on clients. For now, it should be practice models or volunteers. If your provide a strong product, sure, you can get paid… but if not, kindly thanks them and decline payment until you finally know that you’re providing a quality product and service. At this time, you are not, so stop taking poor people’s  money!

I’m sure I’ll get reamed for this like so many others here. I’m mostly just tired of you insulting WCS. He’s helped me quite a bit with his straightforward advice and brash input. Hell, even when Ebi dialed it down he really started making an impact.
Never, ever go to an internet forum fishing for praise. We all see through it… it’s why pretty much everyone but CC, bless his soul – he really is a good guy, is completely tired of your nonsense.

[OldClicks]

@cameraclicker – thanks for taking all that time to test things. I ended up using a different focusing point, and I think things look a bit better.

To everyone else – I added four new photos today, and would appreciate constructive criticism. I went back to what I’m most familiar with – a nice handpainted backdrop, and a pair of umbrellas. Before I mention the lights used, I’d like some feedback.

Thanks!

[ebi]

Boring crap, just like all the rest of it.

sorry, the only constructive criticism I can muster is “find a new career”. You don’t really care for constructive criticism anyways you just want praise. you aren’t getting it so maybe it’s time to move on.

[cameraclicker]

They look like traditional studio photos.   I would try to get more space between subject and backdrop.  They all seem not quite sharp.

The couple, is probably best of the four.   Click on them to see them full size on Flickr.

This is the original:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/54048679@N07/11157399175/

Here is the same photo with a little editing in ACR and Photoshop.  Does it look better to you?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/54048679@N07/11157401655/

This one, https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=664055370305167&set=a.664055330305171.1073741842.591852427525462&type=1&theater, leaves me scratching my head.  The fabric around her head is not really sharp but is best, closest to the camera.  Her eyes are very soft, as is the rest of her face, then there is a lot of texture on her throat!  How did you achieve two planes in focus and the space between so soft?

 

[Author]

Posts