Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 22 total)
  • Author
  • in reply to: This is SO worth the read. #10764

    Ok. We have some scenarios.

    1) She gets paid 25$ to drive across town (say it’s a small town so 3$ in gas for the day) spends… 1-5 hours photographic something. She gets 22$ and a few shots maybe for her portfolio (if they don’t need post processing, I assume) for the possibility of half as much as she would make getting a part time job at a fast food joint.

    2) She uses THEIR camera, thereby only really charging for her time (as see above on money earned) and doesn’t get any of the images to show for it. If by some chance, say, she drops the camera or gets it wet, she’ll be paying between oh… 60 and almost a thousand to replace it, depending.


    in reply to: Newbie looking for constructive criticism #9612

    My photo sensei has always told me that one should get the best body they can reasonably afford on their budget, then spend the rest on glass. This does ring fairly true. Good glass is VERY important in photography. It’s also something you’re going to keep for years. The body of your camera is like buying a new laptop or the like. It’ll be outdated and loose it’s value very quickly.  You’re lenses are the more important investment.

    in reply to: Fauxtogs who should end up on the main page… #9610

    Scrolled back a little ways too.

    For this one, I’m not actually sure if it’s over sharpened or just saved  (or uploaded) at a very poor quality. I’m leaning at crappy quality. The use of flash and such is obviously a mistake. However, it bugs me that it seems that he ONLY takes pictures of women of a certain body type. Though, not sure he took all the photos on the wall. I’m going to guess that it isn’t so much a photographer’s business as a wank wall.

    Next is
    My suggestion to her would be to go out and grab some family, neighbors,  friends, etc and have them pose for some shoots. Not only to build confidence as a photographer, but also to grow her art a bit and get a better hang of her camera. Framing and lightening are the most obvious. The flash is causing issues. Ironing the white sheets in that baby pic might help as well. Watching product placement. Red eye. Some things can be fixed post production. Some can’t.

    in reply to: Fauxtogs who should end up on the main page… #9605

    As per the above post… I don’t think many of the shots are bad. Also note that the wedding was his own daughters. There’s also some street photography in there.  It doesn’t look like he’s selling portraits or anything, and is doing it all for himself. Some of the shots do fit under “fine art” category, though it’s all through the structure of a photoblog.

    in reply to: A Pinterest-ing Discussion… #9604

    This belongs here. Was going to give it it’s own topic, but this thread seems perfect. “Reasons you should never reenact Pinterest photos”

    in reply to: Fauxtogs who should end up on the main page… #8153

    And hadn’t looked through this thread for a long time, so decided to give a good few of them a peak. The dude near Arnold MO probably lives within 30min from the lace I”m moving from. Never met him, and at least I am VERY sure he isn’t part of the meetup group. However, it’d probably be helpful if he was.

    The other, and far more important thing, is that have you noticed that so many of the male “photographers” mainly have crappily shot pics of half naked women. And not even the sort of half naked women you’d have in the studio with proper lighting, costuming, make-up, digital touch-ups, etc but the sort that are just sitting around or standing, or etc.


    in reply to: Fauxtogs who should end up on the main page… #8152

    In reply to owner77.

    In the first image, we can see up inside the little girls nose. That will be a lovely memory for later. “Look how clean my nostrils were at that age!”

    In the second, the whole things is a bit too washed out, yellow, TOO off-center.

    The fourth, the boy looks more desaturated than the door, giving him a ghostly feel. An upset ghost.

    I then moved on to look at the rest, and at this point I decided that the photographer REALLY likes her filters/actions (and most likely, I think, one specific one in particular which uses FAR too much vignette) . It’s understandable. They can do cool things. I was there a few years ago. They do have a place and a use, but like much power, can also be misused easily. It is of my opinion that in this case, such things have been used to the point where they become more of the focus than the image’s true focus; in this case the people.

    in reply to: Wondering if anyone else feels this way… #8151

    Oh, wow. I had forgot this thread existed.

    So. Correction on dad’s wildlife art site URL. It’s I had forgot to type the h

    ALSO, I decided to redo mine. It’s still being worked on (and probably forever will as that particular one is mainly a photoblog to play around on)

    Golly. That was November? Wow.

    And I agree with you, Nick. the social pressures of it suck. Been thinking of trying to sell fine art prints and maybe to newspapers on the side, though. Earn some pocket change (maybe.)

    in reply to: "Freelance Photographer"…More Like Fauxtographer #7611

    I agree with Stef. You have nothing to learn with the woman. Also, while I am all up for networking, I”m not sure she has that in line as she has a LONG way to go.

    PS – don’t put blurry pics on a portfolio unless they are MEANT to be blurry. Otherwise, all you’re showing is that you know how to click a button and upload a file. (Not you, her. But to folks in general. Good advice for lots of upstarts)

    in reply to: faux? #5628

    Oh. Hey. I um… didn’t mean to offend if I did. Really do like alot of the elements. When I got up this morning it hit me that I gave a first impression view without thinking it all over. I still think different shoes in the forest one would help draw the eye to where it needs and there’s certainly inspiration there to expand on the shot more. Also not happy with the sharp shadow under the jaw in the other one.

    I did really like the wigs, though, and what the saturation/etc techniques did to them. Added a slightly more pop art appeal.

    There’s also something about the McD’s food/tray layout that makes me keep staring at it. Couldn’t figure out exactly why it seems off. But still really liked the way your torso is posed with the drink, and the wig.

    in reply to: faux? #5566

    I really like the first one.

    The second one, the shadow under your jawline is far too dark and… you’re at McDonalds? The set-up looks a bit odd. Your personal posing and make-up seem a bit nice, however.

    Don’t like the 3rd one at all. Could probably suggest some diff. shoes with the outfit. Have any slippers or the like which would go with the cape or skirt? Could also suggest a different angle. My roomate does drag on occasion, though it’s a bit more on the goth side than queen. I was supposed to photograph do the variety/drag/burlesque show here in STL but ran out of free time.

    In photography, men look better from below, or the side, etc. while women generally do better if the photographer is above them.  My roomie works well from above, however. It also depends on which features you want to accentuate and what you’re trying to get across.

    For the third image, I like your general idea, but might have suggested a shot from (your) right a bit with the photographer squatting slightly and you looking at about the same angle, though maybe sadder? More peaceful? But for the main one, I’d suggest them behing up a little bit higher. Maybe try a few closer ups with you a bit more off center, as well as some further back to take in the landscape as well.

    If you’re ever in STL, I’d love to go do some photos in one of the local parks.

    in reply to: I am new to this… #5400

    I very much agree on how your holding the camera. Non-shutter-button hand should be resting underneath the lens/body to not only make it easier to do things like manually focus, but to also add more stability to keep away fuzzy shots.

    in reply to: Do I fall under the fauxtog category? #5399

    Fauxtog’s, as I understand, are generally ones who fall under the category of  “I just had a baby and got a camera, so I’m going to be a professional photographer now! I can spend all my time taking pictures of other people’s babies and families and charge them bunches!”

    A photographer is one who enjoys taking photos. It can be somewhat of a passion. You really enjoy what you do and might actually be good at it.  It’s a big group. I certainly fall in it. You strive to be better, to learn, and to capture the moments of the world around you and make pretty things.

    A professional photographer is one who has decided to make a career of it. No matter how good or bad you might be, this is your majority/sole income.  You can create all sorts of horrid looking pieces and have the tact, manners, and grace, of a sick toad and still somewhat be a ‘professional photographer.’

    The technicality is such of that with painters, or acting.

    I really like the variety and different techniques you used in what you linked. It shows creativity as well as a good eye for color, contrast, and composition. You know that it’s not all about babies or teenagers or family portraits. It’s about creating something brilliant.

    On a side note. I have been told that if ever you should go to market your talents, you should narrow down your specialty.  This is (as I am told but don’t quite believe) why so many people mainly do babies, or pets, etc. If you ever choose that path, don’t stop with the rest. Through variety and experimenting we learn and grow in all areas.

    Keep it up!

    in reply to: Swag photography? REALLY!? #5183

    He’s not too terrible for a high school kid starting out shooting. Getting practice early! And he’s also trying to figure out what to do in the years to come. If anything, he should get professional support and honest, valuable, critique if he wants.

    in reply to: THESE people…. Are a joke. Right??? #5109

    Ah. I didn’t dig that deep. Only peered at her most recent works. Like, this month.

    And oh,  hey, she’s local to me. Yeah. Only timeline’d down just past the horse to the flag.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 22 total)