[picstop]

I haven’t really given it a lot of thought but I think that an oof pic has got to be near the top if not at the top of the list of fails for a photo. In this day and age of amazing AF cameras, there is little excuse to not get a shot in focus. Yes, you may have to take responsibility and select an AF point and with regards to the cameras and lenses I use at F2.8 and less, you may have to do a little afma-ing. But for the most part, the photos these fauxs take are snapshots. For example, I looked through a lot of the ones by PH pros. My ancient P&S that I carry around for fun when I go on a hike can get better shots than this https://www.facebook.com/498124273533390/photos/a.505573086121842.121173.498124273533390/881151088564038/?type=1&theater

I don’t think that shot has a focus problem. “ODECA” on the lanyard of the front girl is sharp and the “5″ on the shirt of the girl in row 3 is also pretty good. That suggests focus was achieved and DOF was pretty good too. It’s too bad Facebook strips EXIF data. I suspect that was a pretty slow shutter shot and the blur is due to motion. Lighting in that shot is terrible!

—CC, you’re right. This example was not so much about lack of focus as it was about simply telling your camera to pop flash at min. 1/60’th would have given a half decent snap (which is all it is, a snap). In fact, most P&Ss would default to that while most real photographers would know enough to set their camera to do so manually. In fact, many of his runway shots are suffering from the same problem, slow shutter speeds and flash resulting in haloing.

I’ve never used a $300 bridge camera for model shoots so I don’t know if it’s the camera limiting this “pro” or their inability to actually use it properly.

I think it’s his ability, or lack thereof.

—I was trying to be kind. I figured it’s his ability but, I dunno, I guess I just typed it out that way. No offense to anyone using a bridge camera. I like the example you posted with the G11. A friend of mine used to shoot local bands with the same camera (G11 then G12) for years with decent results. Indeed, telling the camera what you want as opposed to letting it do it’s thing makes all the difference in the world. I’ve never been to Rama (just a tad too far to go) and it irritates me that some people I’ve wanted to see play there and not at venues closer to me. On the flipside, I’m closer to the border so I’ve seen some great stuff over there. No cameras though 🙁

[picstop]

I haven’t really given it a lot of thought but I think that an oof pic has got to be near the top if not at the top of the list of fails for a photo. In this day and age of amazing AF cameras, there is little excuse to not get a shot in focus. Yes, you may have to take responsibility and select an AF point and with regards to the cameras and lenses I use at F2.8 and less, you may have to do a little afma-ing. But for the most part, the photos these fauxs take are snapshots. For example, I looked through a lot of the ones by PH pros. My ancient P&S that I carry around for fun when I go on a hike can get better shots than this https://www.facebook.com/498124273533390/photos/a.505573086121842.121173.498124273533390/881151088564038/?type=1&theater
I realize it’s not a ten grand fashion shoot but why people think they can post something like this is beyond me. If you can’t take a simpe snapshot of a bunch of kids, how can I expect you to take a decent shot of me and hand you cash for it? And on and on it goes as I look through the “portfolio” of shots, one oof after another. Not that the ones in focus are gems of any sort either. I’ve never used a $300 bridge camera for model shoots so I don’t know if it’s the camera limiting this “pro” or their inability to actually use it properly.
I always get a kick out of how people “like” stuff. I guess I have higher standards. Personally, I don’t like “pizza skin”,
https://www.facebook.com/498124273533390/photos/a.726733047339177.1073741857.498124273533390/726739084005240/?type=3&theater
https://www.facebook.com/498124273533390/photos/a.734513066561175.1073741860.498124273533390/734513796561102/?type=3&theater
To be fair, I think some of the soft photos are due to motion blur and/or ridiculously high iso settings (for the camera used). Which though it has little to do with AF, has everything to do with the ability of the photographer/gear.
In the end, just another wannabe in a hack market.

[picstop]

Harry…I hope you don’t think that I meant you have too much colour. I too love colour and by “borderline”, all I meant by that was, in my opinion, you may be getting close to too much saturation. Any more than what you now have may start to risk comic book photos. And by pulling it down a little, I meant that you might want to try it with some, not all, that have strong form/texture, just for something different.
And, WCS, “i.e.: no one will mind if the sky is not the right shade of blue, but if you get the wrong shade of white on a wedding dress, your the devil incarnate” made me laugh. How true!

[picstop]

I take it your main reason for requesting feedback is regarding the colour. Everyone’s tastes will vary so for myself I think they are fine. I’d say you are borderline though and any more and you’ll be oversaturated. Just for fun, try pulling back the colour. Sometimes a muted palette can draw more attention to the form of the subject when you have strong lines or textures. However, if you’re wondering about general feedback regarding the photos themselves, I would call them pleasant. That is neither praise nor condemnation. They are simply pleasant, something you’d see in a calendar but not something that I would print and frame on my wall. Technically they are reasonable but subjectively they are lost in millions like them.

[picstop]

Dean reminds me of a few in my area. I’m not a fashion photographer myself. However, like some in my area who fancy themselves to be fashion/glamour/model photographers, he too seems to be trying to make a few quick bucks off of a few ladies who may or may not ever become models who likely have low budgets for portfolios. Ok, I don’t know all the facts or really any but I know about my local photographers and Dean is almost a carbon copy of them and that’s their story. Tip to the ladies if they ever find this post…”HIRE A REAL photographer if you ever want to get real paying gigs!”. Like the example, urkiddingright posted, were to be in that lady’s portfolio, she would never ever be hired for anything. Or you can continue to enjoy your pics of you looking sexay and out of focus in a random hallway https://www.facebook.com/Dean.Enterprises/photos/a.492337197573211.1073741832.491061987700732/508718985935032/?type=3&theater or pony up some cash and maybe go somewhere with your career. Stop listening to this faux who is likely telling you how great you look while he makes you look horrible. Your choice.
Finally, it makes me cringe to see a wedding photo posted like the couple is missing on a milk carton. Yeah, it’s a bus shelter, practically the same thing. “Hey honey, remember our wonderful wedding day at the bus stop with the lovely garbage can”? https://www.facebook.com/Dean.Enterprises/photos/a.502703786536552.1073741838.491061987700732/502704789869785/?type=3&theater Egads. I would suggest falling back on your previous job of tour guide. Like how that qualified you in any way whatsoever to become a photographer I don’t know.

[picstop]

Thanks, IHF (hope you don’t mind the abbreviation). This looks more promising than the others I’ve seen (Lenstag and Stolen camera finder). It seems unclear if it can see into one of the biggest culprits, the dreaded FB but very practical that you can submit all photos at once. You are a wealth of information. Thanks again.

[picstop]

“FAIR WARNING FOR ALL FUTURE FEEDBACK REQUESTS”….
This is why I don’t even visit a request in the first place. I’ve seen far far too many “requests” such as this on various forums over the years. Too many of them are simply not legitimate. Either they are beginners stocking up with other people’s work or worse, just plain fake (stocked with other people’s work) trying to pimp goods and services (covertly or not) other than photography. Doesn’t seem fair to legitimate people but you can also usually tell by the initial post if something is “off”. This person’s (if there really is a real photographer behind it) first post was “off”.

Anyway, my forte is not programming but how’s this for a new idea. If someone out there on the internet want to make millions off this idea, feel free. This is the digital age (no kidding eh?). There are a lot of ways to find out if your pic has been misused. I can think of a better one. How about, (sort of along the lines of digimarc but something better),someone start a service where every digital picture you take can be “registered” with a digital signature? Every time it’s posted on the internet somewhere, it “calls home” to the company that has registered it. Then, when someone steal it and posts it, it call’s home and the company requests your “key” to authorize the posting of it. No key, no post. I think all the people out there who know about this stuff will poke holes in it and that’s fine but hey, wouldn’t it be nice?

[picstop]

I hate Fauxtography….I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, you are just a gem.

[picstop]

If you think your website has been hacked, contact your webmaster/provider. If you are in charge of your own site, then it’s time to clean it up. If you’d like feedback on how it looks, you’d do better to go to http://browsershots.org/ where they can provide you with visual feedback on how it renders over many different O/Ss and browser combinations.
If you’re here for feedback however on the content, then let us know. It would appear that you’ve likely got all the feedback from CC you’ll need. I myself don’t follow links often and definitely don’t like to peruse any that others have found questionable. In any case, clean it up if needed (before google blacklists you if they haven’t already) and try browsershots for compatibility feedback.

[picstop]

mistiffanybaby….I’ve had a go at poor Aleah before.  Near as I could tell, she only charged for some Christmas photos with another photog.  Are you telling me she charges for everything she does?  IF so, then yes, even though her “about” says she considers herself a photographer in training, then she (and you) need to accept criticism for her work.  Now, not everyone will like every photo but that’s not what I’m about.  I’m about the photo that is really just bad, technically or subjectively.  For example, let’s look at this one,

https://www.facebook.com/AleahLeighPhotography/photos/a.308599292667819.1073742099.121512301376520/308619735999108/?type=3&theater

with 33 likes.  While it is a cute shot of the kid, am I really asking so much for it to be in focus?  Do you know how easy it is to get a shot like this in focus?  So, the most basic thing, focus, is screwed up, the photographer is delusional enough to think it’s great, enough to think it should be public, and 33 delusional people on FB urge her to produce more doo-doo like this by “liking” it.  THAT’S what I’m talking about.  There is pic after pic with the same problem.  And that’s not the same as a “soft” picture.  When focus is on the child’s shirt and not on the eyes, time and time again, that’s a faux or at least someone in denial or having issues learning.  I don’t think too many people took perfect pics from the get-go, but sooner or later you have to figure out what you’re doing wrong and stop it.  Sadly, many fauxs are “photo blind” and don’t see anything wrong with their pics and that’s that.  You would be better telling Aleah that she has some problems she might want to address instead of “liking” her and maybe she will be one of the ones to actually want to improve her photos if she is still learning and avoid photos like this

https://www.facebook.com/AleahLeighPhotography/photos/a.158634304330986.1073741903.121512301376520/158635487664201/?type=3&theater

Just a simple and basic thing like white balance could have made this pic a tolerable basic shot of the couple and their kids.  I know she can do it because,

https://www.facebook.com/AleahLeighPhotography/photos/a.158634304330986.1073741903.121512301376520/158635400997543/?type=3&theater

and while not a stupendous shot, at least her dress isn’t so blue.  Sorry but that’s one of my pet peeves is the “blue wedding dress”.  Unfortunately, she also missed focus yet again.  Sigh.

I’m not going to go on and on over this but tiffany, you have to realize that the thing that drives me nuts at least, is that many people can’t see a bad pic from a good one.  You don’t have to be a great or even good photographer to tell if a pic is crap.  But some people just don’t get it.  Trust me, Aleah is not that good.  That’s not to say she can’t get better.  That is really up to her but people telling her she rocks will encourage her to stay at the level she’s at and that’s doing her a grave disservice.

 

[picstop]

The gallery (it’s not a website) looks good on my 24″ 16×10 monitor. Your problem is with navigation. The swiping is fine but you are forcing me to swipe a lot to see the photos in the middle of the gallery. Or, I could click a button and get a random photo which later, I have to work at it to get back to. I know this layout is cleaner than using thumbs, but think of that photo that’s a gem of a gem that’s hidden in the middle of the pack that someone might not see because they swiped ten times and left or hit button after button (too tiny) and never hit that particular one. Everything has to be quickly and easily accessible. It’s about what looks good, true, but it’s more about what makes your photos quickly and easily seen by a customer. The photos are quite nice but think about how much it would pain you that someone is looking through the gallery quickly and won’t see that one (or more) that really sing.
I’m guessing that you’ll be using this “website” merely as a gallery and contact, pointed to by social media and the like. Because, as CC says, google will never find you. I don’t know if you want the world to find your site, but as a person who writes and maintains his own website, I can tell you that yes, google will likely never find you let along rank you on a page anyone will ever see. I don’t know if there is more to your website (I only see the gallery and mailto). I don’t know if you even care about google or customers finding your site directly without you sending them there.
In any case, image wise, it’s a nice gallery of some nice images for those of us with monitors (or tablets) big enough to appreciate it.

[picstop]

Got it.  Thrown by https://www.facebook.com/123098577771549/photos/a.717610651653669.1073741862.123098577771549/717610618320339/?type=1&theater  Probably just riding on Jessica’s tail.

I noticed the “in training”.  I’m still not a fan of mixing personal and business (whether in business today or working towards it) like her friend Jessica is also doing.

[picstop]

@Anonymoose…I wish I wish I wish FB would start charging people who use it for their “business”.  I’m so sick of seeing people posting pics of their vacation

https://www.facebook.com/AleahLeighPhotography/photos/a.298472207013861.1073742088.121512301376520/298472737013808/?type=3&theater

along side of weddings and so forth.  Please be professional and separate your personal life from your business.  You hear that FB?  Think of the trillions of bucks you can make by actually charging those who use it for business purposes (for which it was never intended).  Businesses pay to advertise, why can’t FB charge for “pro photographers” to use it for their “website”?  It may weed out some of the less professional ones out there.  In any case, pics of sleeping seals doesn’t encourage me to hire you for my wedding.  I don’t want to meet the people for whom it does.

Don’t take this as the harsh criticism that it seems Aleah, take it as advice to look more like someone who does business.  There is nothing wrong with being friendly and approachable but a little more separation between personal and business would be good.  If you feel the need to include something other than past paid gigs, how about shooting some friends and family for fun in locations that are suitable and gives suggestions to those who want to pay for photos.  Go to a park and shoot a day “what a great spot for engagements/family shots/wedding formals”.

[picstop]

The problem is with camera raw. Adobe updates their raw processor according to what cameras existed at the time their software was written. So obviously the 5D3 did not exist when the raw engine for LR3.6 came out. By the time the 5D3 came to market, LR had gone to a newer version and previous ones do not get the new raw engines. So, you either buy a newer version of LR, or use the DNG converter. I would go with option 1. LR5 does indeed support the 5D3 and also has a newer, better processing engine that 3.6. I use a pair of 5D3 cameras in my wedding photography business and used to use PS CS5 and quickly upgraded to CS6. The better raw conversion was worth it. I’ve stuck with CS6 over the cloud though as it still meets my needs. Enjoy the camera and the updated software. You will be amazed at the difference of the better camera along with the processing engine.

[picstop]

“Its all all about shits and giggles.
Could I improve that pic, maybe, I actually don’t care.
Understand this this point very clearly , I post here because I find this place laughable”

Ok, maybe not the true definition of a forum troll but he’s now acting like one (at the very least simply a sh!t disturber). A reaction to negative critique of his blase pics possibly but if he simply wants to stir sh!t, leave him to do it on his own. If he thinks this is the only camera or photography forum where someone spends time stirring it, he’s mistaken. I’ve seen his kind all over. If he wants the world to love him, he should join the rest of his kind on fb. Everyone likes everything there.

[Author]

Posts