This could be controversial, but we'll see how it goes. Discuss.
We are not photographers, just recorders of light.
All my photos are taken with recycled pixels.
Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit.
Wisdom, is knowing not to serve it in a fruit salad.
It is controversial indeed.
I dont really like the concept of making fun of other photographers, making fun of photos is fair game though.
Gear : Nikon Goodness
Website : http://www.peakactionimages.com
Please support Precious Hearts
Constructive Critique of my images always appreciated
Thanks for today's good laugh.
Canon 7D : Canon EF 70-200mm f:2.8 L IS II USM - Canon EF 24-105 f:4 L IS USM - Canon EF 50mm f:1.8 - Canon EF-s 18-55mm f:3.5-5.6
Sigma APO 150-500mm f:5-6.3 DG OS HSM - Sigma 10-20mm f:3.5 EX DC HSM
Speedlite 580 EX II - Nissin Di866 II - Yongnuo 460-II x2 - Kenko extension tube set - Canon Extender EF 1.4x II
Manfroto monopod - SILK 700DX Pro tripod - Remote release - Cokin Z-Pro filter box + Various filters
Current Social Experiment: CAPRIL - Wearing a cape for the month of April to support Beyond Blue
Visit me on Flickr
Criticism is one thing, public humiliation or ridicule is another matter.
I think I'm comfortable with the concept, but the harsh execution likewise with Darren makes me feel uncomfortable.
Some were funny, some were just awkward because , well, the pictures just weren't that bad ......(not for the level of slander given)
Theres taking the pi** and then there's just outright humiliation - and from who? people who for all we know aren't necessarily in a position to be giving expert criticism themselves.
Call me Dylan! www.everlookphotography.com | www.everlookphotography.wordpress.com | www.flickr.com/photos/dmtoh
Canon EOS 5dmk3 : 17-40 F4 L, 70-200F2.8 canon L, 24-70mm canon L, Gitzo Safari +1178 ballhead. |Canon 5dmkII, 16-35mmF2.8 II L, Gitzo 2541 )
Singh Ray/Hitech/Lee assorted filters, Z pro modified system Cokin holder
Post : Lightroom 3.6 catalogue -> Export as 16bit TIFF, Edited CS5 -> resized for web.
I duno what to make of this. public humiliation or ridicule is common in many sites, fail blog etc. Photographers shouldn't be immune.
If these are all people who post themselves as a pro-tog or stick 'photography' after their name, then they should be ready for stuff like this. Most of the criticism seems obvious so I guess it could be worse.
Most of the stuff is off FB anyway, and if you put stuff on FB you expect it to spread around.
Anyway, it's funny for a few pages, but after a while it gets boring and repetitive. (haha this photo looks crap)x 100 ... Not a site I'd likely revisit.
Last edited by reaction; 15-08-2011 at 2:52pm.
I guess if the humiliation is bad enough to warrant an action of libel then, it should not be published.
If it is general ridicule then, might I suggest a part of 'professionalism' would be to (ehem) 'grow a pair'.
Imagine if Gillard, Abbott, Brown etc went off whinging at every web-site that poked fun at them?
My profession has web-sites that make unfounded criticisms of the industry and individuals within it.
Again (as with the threads that bemoan competition for 'togs'), I ask, why do some think that photographers should be 'protected species?'
Last edited by Scotty72; 15-08-2011 at 2:52pm. Reason: spello
Yeah, it's an odd one. I guess to each their own if they want to make fun of something or someone, but if the people being ridiculed are the ones earning money from their photography, well I guess they'd have the last laugh?
The only one I found really odd in that lot was the first 'Theirs... Mine!' one, where "theirs" is clearly a better photo. The rest... yeah, they're not my type of shots but I guess there's worse out there who still get paid. I dunno, I guess to me the whole effort was pretty pointless, if not a little amusing.
some of the pics on that are shocking - really if it was a professional photographer that took them i'd be loath to pay lol
Cat (aka Cathy) - Another Canon user - 400D, 18-55,75-300mm Kit Lens,50mm f1.8, Tamron 90mm f2.8 Macro, Sigma 28-70 f2.8-4 DG, Tripod and a willingness to learn
Software used: PhotoImpact, Irfanview and a lot of plugins
We don't make a photograph just with a camera, we bring to the act of photography all the books we have read, the movies we have seen, the music we have heard, the people we have loved. - Ansel Adams
Haha, I enjoyed that. There are some pretty shocking photographers out there (who knows, maybe I'm one of them and I am just kidding myself).
Still, I think you get what you pay for. There are shonks in every business. If the client want a Rolls Royce or a Daewoo it is their choice. It pays to do your homework. It's a creative industry and nobody should hire a photographer without seeing their work first. If they don't, then they might just get a white vignette.
I now feel much better about myself - I think the good laugh might have been part of it, but witnessing the Dunning-Kruger Effect in action was also good therapy.
I'm off to photograph my nostrils and do a spot-colour edit on it....
Concert Pianist, Test Pilot, Pathological Liar
Nikon D40, Sigma 17-70 F2.8-4.5 HSM, Nikkor AF-D 50mm f1.8
Post Processing: Aperture 3 & Photoshop Elements 6
1DIII, 5DII, 15mm fish, 24mm ts-e, 35L,135L,200L,400L,mpe-65mm
Film: eos 300, pentax 6x7
The common retort towards those whom complain about dodgy services is, 'You shouldda done your research about them before ya handed over yer dosh.'
Yet, when a site opens up allowing the average punter a look in at the dodgy side of the industry, those in the industry suddenly get very shy.
So, do we close down all criticism (satirical or not) about all industry - it would make my job much easier.
Last edited by Scotty72; 15-08-2011 at 10:11pm.
Great quote from the site:
“I used take pictures for fun but somewhere I got sucked into the fauxtography business. I created my own little website with my own URL and even a Facebook fan page. Got sucked into buying the stuff, a new camera, lens, lights, etc.. and just spent WAYYYYY too much money. It looked easy, WRONG! Then I noticed that all my other fauxtograhers friends stuff was looking the same, everyone was copying everyone else. Even when I started out they would copy my crap and it was crap! Facebook has created a haven for narcissistic so called photographers who are gasping for any affirmations/comments in praise of their crap shots. Thank the Lord I was able to see the light and only did this for a year. I got a couple of paid gigs but luckily no one else fell for my fauxtography! I sold all my equipment except for my D90 and a couple of lens. I am now back to doing what I love, taking photos for fun at family functions and events I attend, There should be a 12 step program for fauxtograhers and I am willing to become the first member. I am attaching one of my atrocious photoshop, action so called creative photos for you all to use as an example of what not to do. Yes, I kept my day job and I am good at it!”
As an example of how damaging generic humiliation can be, might I remind people that not so long ago, a certain POTW winner on this site involved heavily white vignetted image.
Personally, I hate heavy Peter Eastway style vignetting but as it's a matter of taste, it's not something I post on a site up for public ridicule to validate my opinion.
You might say the site has been put up purely for humour's sake but is it? the level of nastiness seems quite severe if just for that .