[JCFindley]

Well, this has been a lot more interesting than the Housewives TV my wife has on.

Who had the popcorn?

[JCFindley]

FF, TYTYTY, I really needed some good laughs this evening.

Technically though, she does have something in focus in every shot… buahahahahahahahahahahahaha

The NYPI does not exactly instill confidence in their program with testimonials like this one. Seriously, I wonder what lesson they address actually selecting your focus point instead of letting the camera guess what you want. Must be graduate level stuff….

[JCFindley]

FF, TYTYTY, I really needed some good laughs this evening.

Technically though, she does have something in focus in every shot… buahahahahahahahahahahahaha

The NYPI does not exactly instill confidence in their program with testomonials like this one. Seriously, I wonder what lesson they address actually selecting your focus point instead of letting the camera guess what you want. Must be graduate level stuff….

[JCFindley]

Thanks Andy,

I actually like it as well but thought it made for a good example of the differing tastes in art. It will be seen as over the top HDR by some whereas others will love it enough to actually pay good money for it.

I actually like all the work from the photographer from Germany above.

[JCFindley]

1. I actually like his portraits.

2. I like his art.

3. Art is subjective and is bought after the fact so it is not faux and frankly it is extremely well executed. Whether you like his vision or not is irreverent.

4. Are you a jaded ex girlfriend perhaps? Regardless, you should not let people “piss you off” so easily with what they do.

5. Want to really get pissed and show people what should be on the front page? This image is WAY overdone compared to the artist you posted but yet I sold one yesterday for ~ $600 total cost of ownership including shipping. It has sold before at very large sizes as well. I have no doubt it would belong on the front page IYO though. http://jc-findley.artistwebsites.com/featured/dramatic-skies-jc-findley.html

[JCFindley]

That is the thing about “art” in general. It is a very subjective subject. If you took my best selling images and put them in a room and let a hundred people walk through you would have a hundred different opinions on the piece. One would buy it if they could afford it, had space for it and it fit their needs. One would absolutely hate it and would not be able to believe people pay good money for it and would probably post a link to it here. The other 98 would have varying positions in between the extremes.

The legs are actually pretty well thought out and well executed in my opinion. It is not my particular taste to go on my walls but I do actually see that as being marketable an someone likely will buy it. (If not more than one person.) I rarely call anyone doing “art” out as a faux for that reason so long as the image is well executed and not just a snapshot with lots of special effects done to try and suddenly make it art.

[JCFindley]

My guess is that image has never sold and really, the 10% acceptance rate isn’t that selective when you consider how many people take a picture, put it on FB, have someone say, “Wow, you should sell that” and then put it on an art site along with a picture of a duck in the local park, three shots of their cat, and four of their grandchild eating nachos at a baseball game. (It is a LOT btw.)

I just don’t see how someone labeled a top artist on the site could think, “Wow, THIS needs to be on my site!” Or conversely, how in the world that top artist label is applied.

[JCFindley]

OK, I am not normally one to post in this thread because I do art photography. The big difference with faux work on art sites is the buyer sees it before they spend any money so generally it simply doesn’t sell. They can undercut others all day long but when it come to buying large wall art the buyer is likely to spend big money on the printing, framing and shipping so even if a faux charges 20 bucks as a markup for a 48 inch print it will still cost a LOT of money. It won’t hurt the sales of others at all as people that spend that kind of money buy what they want and it isn’t fauxtography…

But I am absolutely dumbfounded at this. First the art site this is on claims to only accept 10% of artists that apply. Secondly, this photographer is labeled as a “top artists” on the site. And lastly, $525 is the price for a 36×24.

http://www.ugallery.com/photography-los-angeles-2011

I don’t shoot people at all, but  I have to know, am I missing something in this?

[JCFindley]

I took a few minutes and let it scroll a while and they got MUCH better after the first few.  WCS is right on for the first ones but there really are quite a few nice ones further in.

Which of course brings up a good point. Start with your best or people may not make it very far into the slide show.

[JCFindley]

I am not a fan of music when I surf the web but that is just me.

Verizon Fios rocks BTW and they all loaded instantly for me but still I could only find five or six.

The one angel statue has some pretty obvious haloing around the subject and too much black space for my taste. The rest seemed pretty good.

[JCFindley]

Love the macaw

[JCFindley]

WCS and clicker sum up my thoughts as well.

 

[JCFindley]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/96625749@N06/8913350451/

I don’t do a lot of sports photography but did spend some time with a buddy of mine shooting some NCAA basketball games so I could be at least competent shooting my sons. The biggest thing he ingrained on me was never let the shutter speed go below 1/400. The one above could probably benefit from that advice.  I think a shallower DoF would work better to in isolating the subject as well as the stage in the background takes away from the feel for me.

The flowers are generally nicely done but can be a tough sell as everyone shoots flowers. You would either need to market them hard or you will get lost in the crowd.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/96625749@N06/8871488600/

Conceptually I gather you are using the hedge to frame the subject but in execution the subject ends up being a too small within the image and the hedge dominates.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/96625749@N06/8998954541/

Nicely composed with good clouds in the sky that add a lot to the image.

 

[JCFindley]

Wow,

Is this an ex boyfriend and was he a bad breakerupper?

[JCFindley]

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=623451441017257&set=a.502914106404325.127729.502903629738706&type=1&theater

That one has great sales potential as it is. While is HDRs are pushed a bit on the colors they are starting from good compositions and subjects in general and could actually sell as they are. In general, I think most togs that try HDR start out with it a bit over the top and usually tone it down as the progress in their hobby or career and that includes me. I am still redoing some of my older work for that exact reason.

Wedding wise, well, I will let you people shooters talk about that.

(Oh, I get asked to shoot weddings now and then and quote them a 15K starting price. If anyone does take me up on it, I have an outstanding “second shooter” that will tag along with me for 10K of that.)

[Author]

Posts