Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 393 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Be Gentle or Something… #16114
    ebi
    Participant

    what photo in esquire?

    in reply to: Fauxtogs who should end up on the main page… #16113
    ebi
    Participant

    why is it that faux’s like to pose their subjects in unnatural ways with walls?

    in reply to: Polarizing Filters #16112
    ebi
    Participant

    the filter isn’t the solution. You have to build a room around the reflective surface. I do this with V-Flats. It’s flawless, save for the small reflection you’ll have from where the lens shows through the white flat. You cut a hole in one of the walls so that you can slide the lens through. You may also see the folds of the flats but if you position them correctly, you won’t see them.

    in reply to: Some Concerns of Mine #15854
    ebi
    Participant

    what is so cumbersome about sharing my work? This is about you and your work. You get nothing from seeing my work aside from an opportunity to judge my critique based on what you see. Instead of doing that, why don’t you spend the time that you would use looking through my website to instead think about what I say with an open mind. Use that time to think about what you might do differently based on that information. In the end if you don’t agree. Fine, you don’t agree. If you decide to make some changes and you think they work, then great!

    If you just stop being defensive, long enough to listen, you might find that we aren’t all full of shit.

    in reply to: Some Concerns of Mine #15853
    ebi
    Participant

    mind pointing out my contradictions? Aside from a cringeworthy “I could care less”, i didn’t see anything wrong with what I wrote.

    in reply to: Photography Website Feedback #15838
    ebi
    Participant

    you’ve got way too many images still. I was shocked that you’ve actually edited down even more. One suggestion is that you have too many images in one series. choose the best from each series and go with that. I rally don’t think you need more than 20 per gallery. It’s all mainly architecture and I really think that should be just one gallery alone with say no more than 20-30 images. Beyond that, no one is going to look.

    in reply to: Some Concerns of Mine #15829
    ebi
    Participant

    Wow, this is like a long winded response to one of my harsh critiques. Sorry I’m so late to the game.

    I’ve looked around this site at some of the (overwhelmingly negative) feedback that many (if not most) “fauxtographers” are receiving. Constructive criticism by definition should also point out what is working – i.e. apparent strengths that can be built upon.

    Uh, no it shouldn’t. It CAN contain positive feedback but it doesn’t have to. I mean, if you want to be a pussy about your critique, you can point out some good stuff. But you are typically addressing adults in a critique so they should be able to handle it. If they can’t, it’s a tell-tale sign that they aren’t cut out for this business.

    Now one thing that really strikes me is that many of these people giving out the criticism have years and decades of experience as professional photographers but since they hide behind avatars we don’t see any links to examples of any of their work as examples of what exceptional or bona fide photography is.

    Art critics are rarely artists themselves. Film critics don’t typically make films. Why do photo critics need to be photographers? Art is incredibly subjective and to judge ones critique based on their own work doesn’t help you. It only gives you a reason not to accept their critique. The critic’s work is irrelevant to what you need – an honest opinion. It is relevant to what you really want – a reason to feel good about yourself. I have no interest in making you feel good about yourself. I do want to help you, though. Pointing out the positive things you are doing, don’t really help you. Pointing out what is wrong does and then it is up to you to figure out how to fix it. I can provide some pointers but I think that just complicates the issue. As a photographer, my hardest job is solving problems while on the spot. Practice makes perfect.

    If Gordon Ramsay or Raymond Blanc for example were to write blogs lambasting the poor quality of food served in burger vans, greasy spoon cafes or pubs we could take every word they say practically as gospel. Everyone knows who they are – Michelin star awarded chefs, the elite of their profession but even they don’t get rave reviews from food critics 100% of the time.

    You could not pay me to eat at one of their restaurants, just as you couldn’t pay me to take critic from an accomplished photographer. I’ve listened and watched the critiques of some of these so-called professional photographers that charge big money to let them say nice things and be gentle about the bad things about your work. I see no value in that.

    Overall the impression I get is one of fear of and attempts to discourage competition from less experienced market entrants who can undercut prices in a tough economy. It’s the same train of thought as the long running rage against microstock . Yuri Arcurs for one has done very well out of microstock but any claim that he is not a professional photographer could not be taken seriously given the size of his business.

    I’d say we are trying to discourage faux’s from ripping off consumers. Personally, I could care less about people who are undercutting. That isn’t really how I operate. I don’t go into a project trying to “make a deal”. Client’s ask my rate, we negotiate a little bit but I don’t budge that much. If anything, they get less for less, not more for less. As for microstock – stock is typically the bottom of the barrel. And if stock is the bottom of the barrel, you can imagine what we think about microstock. Stock imagery, just like most photography, is expensive to produce. There is a lot of risk with very little reward. I’m less interested in volume and more interested in creating beautiful images. So I work less and make more per job. It pays off in the end. That dude most work like a dog. That sucks.

    The one from the list I find hilarious is that if you use selective colouring you are not a professional photographer. Now I can go into a place that sells wall posters and find an A1 size photograph of a yellow taxi in a New York street – only the taxi is in colour the rest is black and white. There are many versions – put “New York taxi poster” into Google images to see what I mean – most of the results are colour pops. It may be cliche and rather ubiquitous but I’m willing to bet it sells in significant volume.

    So, the objective here is to make a ton of money, not take beautiful and meaningful photographs? I’d rather do both, but if I had to choose just one, i’d take beautiful and meaningful photographs. Don’t get me wrong, I do jobs for the money too. Just as actors make bad films for the money and then do an artful film. But even those money jobs are done on my terms. I still am interested in doing the best I can with the resources I have.

    So come on all you seasoned pros – pick up the gauntlet and show the rest what to aspire to.

    No, I don’t want you to aspire to me. I want you to do your own thing, your way and I’ll let you know what I think. You can take it or leave it.

    in reply to: 18 year-old photographer looking for any and all feedback! #15684
    ebi
    Participant

    stop taking tilted photos. that will help.

    in reply to: Photographer in Training #15683
    ebi
    Participant

    generally unimpressed. but keep shooting. Also, pink ppl…not good.

    in reply to: Opinions, Feedback? #15682
    ebi
    Participant

    srlsy! I needed a TL;DR version.

    in reply to: My Website #15681
    ebi
    Participant

    meh…your responsive site is responsive in a bad way. but you seem to care more about having a laugh. laugh had…all around.

    in reply to: Meg Bitton webinar #15680
    ebi
    Participant

    i’m actually surprised. I like of a lot of her work. I was totally expecting boring photos but I quite like them, with a few exceptions. I hate her website though. I want to navigate myself. I hate slideshows.

     

    in reply to: Whether we like it or not, fauxtogs ARE making money…. #15679
    ebi
    Participant

    You said:

    “In all fairness, I haven’t seen any of her images, but those answers above are verbatim what she said.”

    Yes you have…

    in reply to: On Camera Monitors #15601
    ebi
    Participant

    not a slight at all. Sorry Sharra! I was making a little joke. The monitor idea just over complicates the issue. I can tell you that over-complication is not a faux phenomenon either (i’m not calling you a faux). It’s a very common issue amongst pro’s as well. I worked with this photographer who was spending money hand over fist to try to fix his focus issues. When I suggested he check his vision he laughed. A week later he had a new set of prescription glasses dangling around his neck. Sometimes the issue isn’t the camera, it’s you! That was 10 years ago. These days i’m noticing that my eyesight is not what it used to be. I rely on autofocus quite a bit. It rarely fails me. But I also shoot tethered, mostly, and can check focus. If i’m on a tripod, I can use live view and zoom in to get pinpoint accuracy when not tethered.

    Yesterday, on set, I was having focus issues that I thought were due to a shitty Foba camera stand. Turns out that my rear element on the lens was smudged causing everything to look soft. Cleaning the lens resolved the issue. Back in my teching days, I solved problems by addressing issues one by one. Camera won’t fire? Check Batteries, test. Check lens connection, test. change tether cable, test. Eventually you find the solution. But I don’t think that buying a LCD monitor is going to help you. Sorry to ruffle your feathers. I didn’t mean it like you thought I did. I was only trying to save you money!

    in reply to: Editing advice for a newbie please #15599
    ebi
    Participant

    i believe that mom and grandma are looking for the AOL icon.

    The problem with “save for web” is that if it isn’t already converted into SRGB you could end up with undesirable color shifts. I prefer to process images that will end up online with the sRGB colorspace first. Unless I need to do a lot of retouching, then i’ll process high rez into Adobe 1998, retouch and save final. Then convert to sRGB for the web version, keeping my Adobe 1998 for prints.

    Lately though I’ve been getting a lot of requests for CMYK colorspaces. I think we are getting to a point that a lot of publications/agencies/etc are losing their older staff that have print production experience and are not familiar with CMYK conversions so they’d just prefer to have it done at the source so they don’t have to futz with it. It could also be that they really have no idea what they are doing to begin with and are clueless to their file specs.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 393 total)