Wow. The fauxtog managed to capture a shot as these girls were time warped to another dimension.
← Previous post
Next post →
The only thing I would change about this one is the ear or neck of the girl to the right of the main subject – I’d photoshop that out. Composition is good, lighting good, exposure and color good.
The client loved it – So what’s the problem? Just because it’s not high your self anointed goodness scale doesn’t mean it’s a Fauxtographer.
Actually, this is a fauxtog Dave. What self respecting real photographer would use photoshop effects on their subjects? And I’m betting this is for a wedding…if it is then this is unacceptable work, and the fauxtog deserve a penny.
Remember, just because you don’t like it does not mean others don’t.
It can be well done and yet not something you enjoy.
It’s motion blur INSIDE the car!!! What’s wrong with you?
Sorry Eric – I know a lot of photographers who are very good that use PS, Lightroom, OnOne, etc… on their subjects.
And like the other Dave said – Just because it doesn’t trip your trigger doesn’t mean it’s bad or a Fauxtographer.
There’s a lot worse that has been posted here.
I’m done wasting my time on this site – I’m going back over to p-net where at least you can get constructive criticism of photos and agree to disagree.
this is not a great example, but not all PP is bad.
You’re right, Dave. It’s some of the best work I’ve seen. I’d pay for that.
Who says the client loved it? Someone on facebook loved it, could have been the fauxtog’s daughter?
Lol… I bet it’s the same person…
This picture is bad. Point blank.
Having been a bride myself, I would have been really upset to get something like this. It is going to date horribly, and the motion blur has been poorly done. As someone mentioned above, it is inside as well as out. It looks more like they are going into hyperspace!
This photo may have been acceptable without the crazy blurring, but WTF is the blue thing on the dashboard?
Other reasons why I don’t like this photo. The backs of peoples’ heads, unless done well (and this is not), is a boring subject. The photo would have looked stronger if at least one of the girls was looking back towards the camera, preferably the bride so that you could see her face peeking around from the front seat. As it is, the angle is poorly done so that you can barely see her at all.
My solution when doing a similar shot, was to have the bridesmaids all look back at me, and the bride to look into the rearview mirror, so while she was facing forward, you could still see her eyes. It worked pretty well!
I was wondering about the blue thingo too. My eyes don’t know where to look at this picture. It’s just meh.
It looks like they’ve just crashed the car into a tree – no driver, and is that an airbag gone off on the dashboard? I guess it would explain why the camera is broken and everyone’s neck is too stiff to turn and look at the camera 8)
What I’m trying to say is, no-one should ever use ‘special effects’ to try to dress up a boring crappy photo of the back of people’s heads. Learn to throw out the crappy photos (we’ve all taken some, just not everyone tries to sell them or promote with them). Start with a good photo, + use less (or no) effects = much better result.
This photograph conjurs Rebecca Black’s “Friday” video… “should I sit in the front or the back? It’s Friday! Tomorrow’s Saturday! This picture is as bad a hack job as I am!”
Yes! My thoughts exactly!
If you use special effects in photos, you are a fauxtographer. end of story.
Yup, indeed, terrible photo. Using special effects ins’t a bad thing (taking a picture is composition, edit it after is creation), but it only works if you know what you are doing.
Here, for example… what about the blur thing ? I’m thinking about it, and can’t be the speed of the car, the blur effect is inside… hm… the only explanation is this photo is a eye-view of some monster, running behind the car and wanting to catch the girl in the middle. Yep, she’s going to have a bad time.
I would have set the camera on a slow shutter speed and actually captured the blur effect outside the car by holding the camera still. However, I would have taken another shot at a fast shutter speed of the individuals inside the car to make sure they were not blurry and then mask the two together to get the best of both worlds in Photoshop! This would have been cool. Just something to try next time in this situation.
Umm…before we get all of our panties in a bunch, if you look closely it says “QUINCE.” Which means, QUINCEANERA, which is a “Sweet 15” in the Hispanic culture. They are supposed to be fun pictures for a fun event for a teenage girl (who would probably think this effect is the coolest thing, judging by some of the 15 year olds I’ve taught.) Hey, it’s not a wedding at least, right?
I noticed that too, but what 15 year old girl would consider a picture of the back of their head “fun.” Horrible picture with and without the “special” effect. I am not a photographer, but even as a snapshot this would be an immediate DELETE!
The ear (?) is what really tells me this wasn’t a competent photographer doing a cheesy shot (possibly on request). That girl’s (?) ear is like 10 feet long, dangling behind her. I am weirded out.
they must have been in the doctor’s parking space.
I stop by this site every once and a while to give myself a laugh. I’m only 22 years old, but have acquired a bachelors degree in Film Science and am a working PROFESSIONAL. I would NEVER even come close to THINKING about taking this photo, much less trying to show it to anyone. That effect is merely a cheap digital way of trying to duplicate a lensbaby-like effect, which can look very nice if done tastefully.
I clicked on the comments thinking, “No one could possibly think this is good.” Only to see the gentlemen at the top of the page.
I don’t want to live on this planet any more.
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.