Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
alexandra
ParticipantBeen away for a while, but that “family photo gem” one. Just. Wow. Laughed for a good 5 minutes though…
Anyway, here’s one from my city with a few gems I couldn’t help but to share – came up in my newsfeed when he’d shot some incredibly unflattering photos of a friend a while back…
Let’s start with a status update:
https://www.facebook.com/michaelbrayphotography/posts/830852570331988Speaking of train tracks, no such think as train tracks too small:
https://www.facebook.com/michaelbrayphotography/photos/pb.686776051406308.-2207520000.1430352414./686780524739194/?type=3&theaterSome NSFW, but this is by far one of the worst boudoir sets I’ve ever seen:
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.686782978072282.1073741829.686776051406308&type=3alexandra
Participant“I use only natural light and the built in camera flash if needed”
because according to this ad apparently using diffused light from off-camera flashes is harmful for baby’s brain development, while pop-up flash is not…I wish there was a Facebook page for this one (or website as promised), but I didn’t find anything unfortunately…
alexandra
ParticipantThat Maria Ann Photography one was pretty priceless! Can’t get over some of these!
So apparently whiteout can now also be used for a bridal manicure?
https://www.facebook.com/372589889490058/photos/pb.372589889490058.-2207520000.1411524070./626002587482119/?type=1&theaterCan someone please explain to me where in this photo there is something that remotely had to do with safety?
https://www.facebook.com/372589889490058/photos/pb.372589889490058.-2207520000.1411524070./609573725791672/?type=1&theaterI wouldn’t be too thrilled either if someone took a photo of me from that angle, with that lighting, using that poster as a prop:
https://www.facebook.com/372589889490058/photos/pb.372589889490058.-2207520000.1411524070./397702313645482/?type=1&theaterAngles people. Angles!
https://www.facebook.com/372589889490058/photos/pb.372589889490058.-2207520000.1411524070./394410403974673/?type=1&theater“Talents” – like I hate to be mean, but I really hope the hunting’s working out for her, because I’m not so sure about the photography and modelling…
https://www.facebook.com/372589889490058/photos/pb.372589889490058.-2207520000.1411565858./431234533625593/?type=3&theateralexandra
ParticipantLOL – browsed through that “Sissie Moe’s Photos” one…
really? -> https://www.facebook.com/SissieMoesPhotos/photos/pb.361839000513551.-2207520000.1409261966./718886624808785/?type=3&src=https%3A%2F%2Ffbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net%2Fhphotos-ak-xap1%2Ft1.0-9%2F1234015_718886624808785_1379632486_n.jpg&size=960%2C640&fbid=718886624808785
UHM REALLY? -> https://www.facebook.com/SissieMoesPhotos/photos/pb.361839000513551.-2207520000.1409261886./765696133461167/?type=3&src=https%3A%2F%2Fscontent-a-ord.xx.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-xaf1%2Fv%2Ft1.0-9%2F10171754_765696133461167_7368058554855220787_n.jpg%3Foh%3D05491652503344b43a37e52758199419%26oe%3D5467E873&size=960%2C538&fbid=765696133461167
Haven’t spotted anything too atrocious out there recently – this one however came up as a facebook ad:
https://www.facebook.com/kathleensack/photos/pb.264654277749.-2207520000.1409262566./10152194130232750/?type=1&theater
I don’t understand how 3 photos in a row are dedicated to the same terrible pose ^ They could turn into a gif or something…alexandra
Participant^ that one’s beyond terrible. Not to mention they didn’t make a page, just made it as a person. Weird. Also, some photos near the end look like they were stolen…
Found some local ones this morning.
Grey baby:
http://www.kijiji.ca/v-photography-video/london/mothers-day-photography-special-15-00/584312909?enableSearchNavigationFlag=trueAnd this one. To her defence she’s not charging, but at this stage of learning, I wouldn’t recommend having a facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/kaylapoolescapturedmoments3alexandra
ParticipantHahaha I’m probably laughing at that lighting configuration more than I should! But never the less that one’s a really great find!
alexandra
Participant“Artistic” filters galore… How in the world does this have 14k+ likes???
https://www.facebook.com/pages/TJS-Photography/138635779594592alexandra
ParticipantLOL I just noticed her “feet growing out of head” pose on that back cover… a new take on bunny ears I’m guessing? Even if she didn’t take that, she still posed that way, and approved of it for her book…
alexandra
ParticipantAt least she didn’t write a book on lighting and editing. Her posing may not be the best, but I think the lighting and editing in those photos is far worse…
alexandra
ParticipantOh wow… I don’t think I’ve ever seen a more atrocious website than that pic chick one. Almost as terrible as her photos… And what’s with her flaunting that 3.2 megapixel point and shoot camera? Sure, a good photographer can take a good photo with just about anything, but in this case if she’s planning on shooting in fully automatic mode with automatic flash forever, better equipment won’t do much for her.
Which one of her photos was done using continuous light? Most of them look like she just used flash to me…
I’m curious though – is it possible to tell apart a photo done with a continuous light set up from one done with strobes or speedlites?
I find that the continuous light sources usually aren’t bright enough for my needs usually (I usually use 3 or 4 speedlites for studio stuff)…alexandra
ParticipantA friend of mine ‘liked’ one of those ‘like ladder’ pages, so I decided to go through all those leaving their pages in the comments suspecting some gems to be hiding within, and of course within a minute I came across this one…
Let’s start with this totally legit-looking background swap of the fauxtog herself:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=390575600996625&set=pb.331160630271456.-2207520000.1393194017.&type=3&theaterGaussian blur background with extremely terrible masking:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=542141932506657&set=pb.331160630271456.-2207520000.1393187559.&type=3&theaterWas this supposed to be an attempt at making a reflection effect?
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=576832175704299&set=pb.331160630271456.-2207520000.1393193354.&type=3&theaterIt seems there’s someone else’s watermark in the bottom left corner in addition to this fauxtog’s own:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=491592967561554&set=pb.331160630271456.-2207520000.1393193670.&type=3&theateralexandra
ParticipantI’ve shared this one here before (mostly due to really excessive skin smoothing, and weird backdrop editing), but now they’re using a cover photo that’s definitely not theirs. They’re in no way claiming it as their own, but it does give people a false impression…
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1446344525585272&set=a.1425290477690677.1073741826.1425282171024841&type=1&theateralexandra
ParticipantHere’s one:
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Erin-Elizabeth-Boegel-Photography/585678944778103I honestly think this boudoir album should be renamed to “butts” or something (caution, kinda NSFW):
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.718060028206660.1073741845.585678944778103&type=3
but with that I wanted to bring up – the caption says that “faces have been removed for personal reasons”. Usually, when someone asks not to post their photos online, you don’t post them online, not crop off their head…alexandra
ParticipantThat MB one was quite scary… especially this one, where the selective color makes it look like that heart was carved out of her skin or something…
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=516029701801998&set=pb.191304407607864.-2207520000.1387252637.&type=3&theateralexandra
ParticipantThis isn’t another fauxtog submission, but I thought this was a pretty funny post from “What we should call wedding photography”, especially when there are likes and positive comments on some of the front page-worthy photos that are shared here…
-
AuthorPosts