Should Have Been Deleted

Was this fauxtog jumping in and shooting behind the actual photographer? Either way, how does this not get deleted right away?

← Previous post

Next post →


  1. Inception.

    It’s a picture of a picture within a picture.

    • It’s probably the only pic where the couple is smiling…

      • I was just going to say…with the low light… Probably the only one of the couple that turned out clear lol.

    • It’s not enough, we need to shoot deeper.

  2. Or maybe tighten it up.. a lot?

  3. That’s lovely, definitely something I’d like blown up on my mantle.

  4. they couldve at least cropped it…put it in black and white and added lighting…

  5. You are forgetting the first rule of photography. People like photos they look good in. He looks fine in this photo.

    Deleting a photo where the person paying you looks good is a conceit you can’t afford.

  6. Was it the only one that wasn’t blurred, so it stayed in by default?

  7. Maybe the real photographer wanted the bride to see how much of a pain in the *ss Aunt Ethel was- by stepping in front of them on EVERY shot. Kinda like “This is why you don’t have certain shots- I couldn’t get them, with stupid people stepping in my way!!”

  8. If this was done to prove a point – as mentioned above – that hey – your friend, family member, guy off the street – whatever kept getting in the way – then I’m okay with it as is.

    If I had no other shot of this couple that was clear or sharp then this would stay, but with heavy cropping and editing.

    If these were out of camera proofs – it would stay.

    It would not be published as a final work product in any circumstance – and if it were published there would be a disclaimer.

    Keep in mind that even Ansel Adams worked on his photos in post production – writting very detailed instructions for each print regarding exposure, dodging and burning, along with development times and temps. Very few if any of his images where “out of camera”.

  9. I know a mother/daughter wedding fauxtog team that has not shot any wedding as the photographer but their port is full of “we shot these as guests” stuff. Worse than this. Plus they love to over use filters in PS Elements.

    BTW the mother got into fauxtography because her husband found the camera on the side of the road….

  10. How clueless can they get

    could maybe crop a tolerable pic out of there, but why

  11. Anonymous

    Ummm this is a photojounalistic style… duh

  12. I assume this person didn’t charge money for this…isn’t it just a personal photo? If so, no problem. I’ve done the same myself–taking a picture of someone else’s shot. But I didn’t try to sell it or whatever. It was just a picture.

Leave a Reply