Ghost Belly

ghost belly

I wonder if they’ll name him Casper?

← Previous post

Next post →


  1. supercalafragalisticexpialadoshus!!! BTW – i dated a guy named Casper.

  2. Who put her under a blacklight? And what is with the fuzz?

  3. nairbynairb

    Whats with the influx of posts that don’t look like they’re from someone who is claiming to be a photographer?

    • People who take pictures are photographers whether they have a business or a watermark or not. This person edited the hell out of this image with some type of software. Thus, they think they are a good photographer. This is faux work hands down.

      • Hey Joe

        The overwhelming theme on this website is that these people claim to be “professional” photographers, running a business, and sucking at it. Editing a picture doesn’t make someone a photographer, per se.

    • broken_sporty

      One does not have to be a photographer of any sort to appreciate that there is a lot of crap out there under the guise of a “professional watermark.” The digital photography era has made it far too easy for people to produce work that to some eyes will pass as “amazing.”

      I am an extreme hobbyist photographer, but do not have any aspirations of accepting money for the work I do because I know my limits. I have been shooting with various SLRs since 2001 and people have encouraged me to go into business for years. What sets me apart from the fauxtogs on YANAP is that I realize that I do not have the training/ability/equipment to be a “professional.”

      • nairbynairb

        A fauxtographer can only be judged if they accept money for their photos… Otherwise they’re just a hobbyist and it doesn’t matter what anyone thinks.

      • broken_sporty

        It is hard to tell the difference sometimes though. Some hobbyists make up what looks like a business name and have a facebook page for their “work,” even though they have not taken payment nor do they intend to ever take payment. They spend time editing and watermark the photos with their “business name” then post the photos as if they are “professional. From the outside looking in, we simply can’t tell the difference.

    • Ipshwitz

      I would normally agree with you, except that this wasn’t just a hobbyist. It was someone trying to be professional. For starters, you can see that someone posed the couple. Good or bad, they were posed. The couple had direction of where to put there hands, where to look, where to stand, etc. So it’s not just a friend photo. Also, the editing shows all the traits of a fauxtographer. Even if they used something free like Gimp. Just because the person didn’t watermark it, doesn’t mean they aren’t telling people they are a photographer.

      • And just because someone edited a photo doesn’t mean they were charging money for it as a professional.

    • BurninBiomass

      Found him, and apparently he was a graduate of the Australian College of Photography and REALLY likes that softening filter.

    • Haven’t you noticed that the website gets ad revenue now? More posts = more money… So posting crap that doesn’t really fit the theme is good for business.

      • LOL for sure I keep waiting to see one from MY photo album on Facebook here. I’m just a hobbyist too, but when a friend asks me to take a few snaps at a birthday party or even if I just take a shot of a sunrise, I usually do SOME editing..if only to straighten a horizon or clone out an off-frame shadow. I’ve even been known to pass my camera off to somebody else and post their shots. Sometimes my subjects even pose, though some are better at posing than others. (I hate posing people for snaps..but I digress).

        So I thought it was about taking money for subpar work. Now I get the vibe that it’s about having the nerve to use photographer techniques and software to improve shots that are only meant to be shared “for free”? Damn, but I’m confused.

        This would be like showing up at your Auntie’s 49th birthday and ripping on the cake because it was frosted entirely with buttercream…*sigh*…made with MARGERINE! *gasp*

  4. GeekAndProud

    someone turned soft focus up to 11

  5. Focus, people, focus.

  6. I think it needs one more duplicate-layer-overlay-gaussian blur of 99 and it would be just right. As it is, I can still almost see her eyes.

  7. That guy’s hand is bigger than her head! I am totally freaked out.

  8. Since a post apocalyptic society is in the future, people that glow in the dark may soon be the norm. This is perfectly prescient.

  9. I’m not sure why you are all hating. The fauxtog chose every button at least once on the photo manipulation menu. Well, except for sharpen.

  10. sadly this “photog” is apart of a cc photog group i am in and sees nothing wrong with his work…

Leave a Reply