Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
fstopper89
ParticipantUpdate 2! She deleted the original post and then posted a new rant about how people need to be constructive and not critical. I reiterated that my evaluation of the photo being out of focus was constructive and that if she wants to improve she will take advice given to her. She told me “You must be jealous.” I asked of who. She said “others.” THERE YOU HAVE IT. Jealousy!
ParticipantUpdate. After she posted said oof photos of a pregnant belly, while others said nothing but “beautiful” and “gorgeous,” I posted that it was out of focus and should not be shown to the client. A few others agreed, and she whined that she wasn’t asking my opinion and just wanted to know black and white or color. Then came the line of “This was just a test shoot with only natural light in a dim room and wasn’t a ‘professional’ shoot anyway.” (Excuses…) She also said that line about it’s art and some people will have different opinions. Then she said she was being judged harshly and told me “go away.” Then deleted the post after a few more people wrote that it was out of focus and couldn’t be saved by making it black and white.
Yup. Fauxtographers have NO interest in learning how to improve.
Participant@Makeitstop is right. This is really just kind of entertaining (in a gaping-jaw type of way… like “What the heck are these people thinking?”) but also can be used in an educational manner when discussing with people why one must pay what we charge if they want truly professional work. And while the quality and value of a professional’s work does vary in level with some being better than others (and often subsequently charging a lot more and having clients seek them out from far away), fauxtography seems to oddly follow a lot of the same patterns and fauxtographers often seem to follow personality/intelligence patterns as well. I haven’t figured that out yet.
This person posted a blurry awful shot in a group asking “color or b&w?” Well, if you have to ask, neither. Then I saw the rest of her work.
https://www.facebook.com/Capturedphotographyottawa?pnref=story
ParticipantEvoYno’s page is quite confusing. I saw maybe a dozen shots that I’d consider decent, and the rest were blue babies, railroad tracks, poorly lit, or selective color. Major lack of consistency and I don’t think any client would know what to expect.
Not Belinda… What is this? https://www.facebook.com/319287354932769/photos/pcb.353755234819314/353752694819568/?type=1&theater
This one was outed on PhotoStealers last month. She has since removed the dozens of stolen images from her page and her website eventually went completely down. Looks like she did some of her own work last week: https://www.facebook.com/abbiophotos
Participant“I couldn’t decide to go with color or selective color.” https://www.facebook.com/PreciousLovePhotography2.0/photos/a.495990807207813.1073741829.495835707223323/555199051286988/?type=1&theater
Just look at all these. Can’t even manage to get the subject in focus. And there are train tracks!
ParticipantWell I posted the last one too soon.
Front page material: https://www.facebook.com/christyrosephotographymoments/photos/pcb.434355603373488/434355460040169/?type=1&theater
Seriously, she posed this child like one of her strippers. https://www.facebook.com/christyrosephotographymoments/photos/ms.c.eJw1zksOwEAIAtAbNfgb9f4X6xTt8gVIcO1EeqakHPPH6cbnaBkXhC6sxehTazUEvFrXpnTZOg4dvc7gHmddxVxz3CI0~;Hd~;zp6~_3IGVXc6f2~_Y~;LbwcnCoT.bps.a.429707427171639.1073741871.125922810883437/429707907171591/?type=1&theater
The offending prop. https://www.facebook.com/christyrosephotographymoments/photos/pcb.397102787098770/397098407099208/?type=1&theater
The typical YANAP photo: https://www.facebook.com/christyrosephotographymoments/photos/a.282662595209457.1073741832.125922810883437/395030973972618/?type=1&theater
Now offering “enhanced photos” for an extra cost! More like extreme gaussian blur on face…? https://www.facebook.com/christyrosephotographymoments/photos/a.282662595209457.1073741832.125922810883437/394557177353331/?type=1&theater
The only thing worse than selective color, is where they made just the person’s face/hair SEPIA. https://www.facebook.com/christyrosephotographymoments/photos/ms.c.eJw9y8kNADEIQ9GORmEz0H9jo7Dk~_GR~;cbLQAIScOT8p52lb27hMuda2P1dPmN7MOUPi9ei~;rV0SdnR7IO9~_FGP1MmIcdP8CH2fvFD~_b3icD.bps.a.367605963381786.1073741847.125922810883437/371584866317229/?type=1&theater
ParticipantThis person randomly was posting an ad for herself in…. drumroll… a photography group.
I can’t figure out what exactly her business name is. Watermark says one thing, tag in caption says one, and page title says another.
These fauxtographers don’t seem to get that boudoir is supposed to be classy, not like the back room of a shady strip club.
ParticipantWhat did the family think when they received this gem?
It would not be fauxtography without a set of railroad tracks.
ParticipantHmm… this person was advertising on a yard sale site today. Scrolling on this page, I saw where she was ridiculing “outrageous” prices for wedding photographers. Someone beat me to it but I didn’t want to comment.
Her photos are almost all blurry and awful, and many have sloppy selective coloring. https://www.facebook.com/mattymayphotography/photos/ms.c.eJxFzFEKADEIA9EbLWrcaO5~;sUKl7e9jGDeWdyUkwkqfHyBDlbwQu2i7oCke9DzywD8P8AFCTMOAQrtwcQFXXxuf.bps.a.1067187406629749.1073741850.841084669240025/1067192936629196/?type=1&theater
ParticipantSuzanne has an entire post on her business page about why you should hire a pro and blah blah blah… except she’s like the $100 photographers she’s suggesting against!
AND SHE CAN’T EVEN SPELL CANON CORRECTLY! For crying out loud! It’s not a big thing that goes boom and shoots lead balls out!
ParticipantOh dear…
#1: Boudoir. It’s supposed to be tasteful and empowering. Not making you look like a cheap stripper.
#2: They ALWAYS manage somehow to get the tree growing out of a head. Another one in this shoot had the fake background blur creeping onto the man’s face.
https://www.facebook.com/923482497696831/photos/ms.c.eJw9j8kRxEAIAzPa4j7yT2zt0cjPrgYJNjR2PNZssve34LQsXbXLYfD68fGSZAcHuc981eXUnE0z5qfDC3ne~;Rn6gk~;6CngnIz~_YXwtmf6NPmNcB5nyf~;6b5Xy88~;xv0O~;sH~;cX~_J~_CZ1~;14j8~_5vLhH7z0rcnz0yyky5363~_gM9gk7~;.bps.a.941498319228582.1073741835.923482497696831/941498349228579/?type=1&theater
She posted two family photos in a photography group and I had to do a double-take as I thought someone was again posting random cell phone snapshots on the photography group.
On her page she said she just upgraded to the Canon T5i (except she wrote it like “T5 iii”) Upgraded from what? A point and shoot?
Participanthttps://www.facebook.com/SistersPhotography13?pnref=lhc
1. Pop-up flash
2. Bad grammar
3. Posts personal stuff to business page (she ran over a gigantic pile of 2x4s and got a flat tire… what?)
4. A bazillion cheesy props
5. White vignette
6. Poor concept of graphic design
7. Posts incessantly about all the lame new backdrops that just came in to the studio
ParticipantParticipantNoise makes a difference to me much of the time but not always. The overall quality, including the crispness/sharpness (not referring to focus here) can be very dependent on the level of noise-less-ness of the camera’s sensor, most often visible of course in low-light situations. When shooting indoors, at weddings, or portraits in darker/shaded areas or at dusk, I would never want to use my older Rebel because of this. It’s not that I’m going to necessarily print every photo, but having the option to do so, and giving my clients the option to do so (in large sizes) to me, is part of the professional aspect. Given good lighting conditions, a low-end or older body with a sensor that produces more noise is still going to produce a good photo and be relatively noise-free. Because I’m not always shooting in perfect lighting conditions, I use a camera that can handle low light well- the 5D Mark III.
ParticipantThis topic has already been chewed up and swallowed, but I wanted to give my input.
When I first saw the photo, I said “white and gold.” I knew the ACTUAL colors presented in the crappy photo were not true white or true gold, but I was accounting from the perspective of the photo being low-quality, poorly-lit, and poorly white balanced. Such as, when you see fauxtography of a bluish wedding dress that was supposed to be white. I saw the actual colors in the photo to be muddy bronze and dusty periwinkle. I sampled the colors in Photoshop’s color picker and that was confirmed as well. The thing is, our brains, depending (so they say) on how the cones in our brain account for light affecting hue (color) we pick one or the other extreme. Naturally, especially when influenced by the choice “blue and black” or “white and gold” our brains will pick one or the other. The argument I got into with a few people was that “well I saw it correctly because the real dress is black and blue” but the PHOTOGRAPH of the dress was NOT black and blue. The pattern I noticed as well was people, like me, who have eyes that are very sensitive to light, saw it as white and gold. To me I feel that having light-sensitive eyes is actually beneficial as a photographer because I’m more in tune to how lighting can change the color of someone’s skin or clothing in the photo, and i can correct it accordingly.
-
AuthorPosts