Facebook "Pros"

[frommrstomommy]

TPF-ers love to beat this dead horse.

 

[Designer]

Im sorry for the rant but someone had to say it.

You should relax and accept it for a simple flaw in human nature.

This happens in other fields as well. Some "arts committee" or some "architecture committee" will sometimes select the worst art or architecture based mostly on the selling ability of the designer. I used to become quite incensed over the phenomenon, but have since mellowed.

If people want to accept horrendous "art" because they simply don't know what they are doing, we would love to offer some insight, but the simple fact is; there isn't enough time in the world to educate everyone about everything.

 

[Overread]

When will people learn that the average "Facebook professional" is just a hobbyist doing some weekend work here and there to support their hobby and that people have been doing that ever since people started doing hobbies. It is getting a little silly that so many get bent out of shape over this topic on such a regular basis. It's time to move on people (unless you're getting that government grant to invent a pill to cure the problems of the human race).

Seriously why worry about it?

 

[The_Traveler]

Anyways. Call out culture is annoying. The unending drumbeat of "such and such/so and so are/is very bad" is the single most annoying thing about TPF, and it makes the site look like a bunch of insecure weenies.

in all reality, the REAL solution is for us, as responsible and caring forum members, to NOT fall into the viscous cycle of traps these threads lead us into. To see those baited topics in the thread title and not even even click on it and give it the courtesy of a view, letting it quickly fall into the unreplied depths of the forum to die.

the TOPICS are not the biggest issue. its how we deal with them that defines the thread.
just walk away and let it go man. don't let it harsh your mellow.

It is getting a little silly that so many get bent out of shape over this topic on such a regular basis. It's time to move on people (unless you're getting that government grant to invent a pill to cure the problems of the human race).

It was not enough to just like those statements. I had to quote and add a 'yeah'

 

[DBA]

According to a media analyst's report released less than two weeks ago, a little over 500 million photos are "uploaded and shared" every single day on social media sites; over 350 million of those photos are uploaded and shared on Facebook each day. 350 million images per DAY, on Facebook alone. KPCB Internet Trends 2013 (see the slide on page 14 for this data)..

Are those unique photos or just uploads? What I mean by that is go look at a popular meme and how many of your friends uploaded that same image.

 

[ronlane]

When will people learn that the average "Facebook professional" is just a hobbyist doing some weekend work here and there to support their hobby and that people have been doing that ever since people started doing hobbies. It is getting a little silly that so many get bent out of shape over this topic on such a regular basis. It's time to move on people (unless you're getting that government grant to invent a pill to cure the problems of the human race).

Seriously why worry about it?

I agree with this. This happens with other services and products every day. Example, Walmart/Target aren't taking customers away from high-end NYC stores/Rodeo Drive stores and the Dollar Store/Dollar General aren't hurting Walmart/Target. Rolex isn't lossing customers to Timex. One last example, Porche isn't hurt by Chevy/Ford and Chevy/Ford has been hurt by cheaper vehicles like Yugo (from the 80's - 90's). Infact the Yugo was so cheap that it has gone away, which is what will happen to most of the Facebook "Pros".

 

[Derrel]

According to a media analyst's report released less than two weeks ago, a little over 500 million photos are "uploaded and shared" every single day on social media sites; over 350 million of those photos are uploaded and shared on Facebook each day. 350 million images per DAY, on Facebook alone. KPCB Internet Trends 2013 (see the slide on page 14 for this data)..

Are those unique photos or just uploads? What I mean by that is go look at a popular meme and how many of your friends uploaded that same image.

The data is from an annual report that Mary Meeker releases every year. She is an analyst partner at KPCB, (Kleiner Perkins Caufield Byers), and the data is from her report released last month. The full report is at 2012 Internet Trends ? Kleiner Perkins Caufield Byers

I cannot address the meme versus unique upload question. I thought it was interesting that her report notes that smartphone users access their camera an average of eight times per day. That's probably more times per day than the average "photography enthusiast" picks up his or her camera on an average day.

I thought her page 40 was so interesting that I decided to do a screen capture of it. It kind of typifies some of the things that came up earlier in this thread.

 

[JacaRanda]

I have mixed feelings on these sorts of topics. on one hand, they rarely involve much "intelligent" discussion, nor do they often end in anything but the thread being locked and someone feeling like they need an icepack for their butt. the simplest and easiest answer would in fact, be to just ban the topic all together. on the other hand, once you start censuring the forum down to that level based on how often those topics go down in flames, you would have to add an awful lot of other topics as well. "new photographers starting a business", "what equipment for my new business", "how much to charge for my new business", and of course, "I just bought my DSLR and my "friends" want me to shoot their wedding because they love my FB pictures from prior "shoots".

in all reality, the REAL solution is for us, as responsible and caring forum members, to NOT fall into the viscous cycle of traps these threads lead us into. To see those baited topics in the thread title and not even even click on it and give it the courtesy of a view, letting it quickly fall into the unreplied depths of the forum to die.

the TOPICS are not the biggest issue. its how we deal with them that defines the thread.
just walk away and let it go man. don't let it harsh your mellow.

I wish I could give this a Quad like! :hail::hail::hail::hail:

Some things are just not worth it. One of the toughtest things ever is trying to teach someone that does not want to be taught, or reason with someone not reasonable.

 

[esselle]

Think the issue the OP has is that of he dislikes that this person is "touting" his work on FB, and he himself would not do so with that caliber of work. Understood. But, I like the poster who commented that it can be likened to eating at a bad restaurant. While we may not "like" something, someone else might. Plenty of music my kids listen to that is (to me) horrible. From a talent perspective. But, apparently not everyone agrees. If someone touts his work on FB, the best thing to do, if u don't like it... is don't look anymore. :') I'm not a fan of FB... it has bred a culture of false praise, just my opinion.

 

[nola.ron]

What I really want to see is the OP's work. I bet there's plenty of people that have seen his work on facebook and thought the same thing. After all, the first thing the OP said before his senseless rant was how new he is to photography while at the same time touting his ability to judge and critique photos.

 

[tirediron]

Okay folks, I am NOT fond of this sort of discussion, so let's please keep it on the straight and narrow. Speculating on the OPs quality of work isn't going to go anywhere good. If he or she wishes to post in the galleries for C&C, then great. If not...

 

[Ballistics]

Okay folks, I am NOT fond of this sort of discussion, so let's please keep it on the straight and narrow. Speculating on the OPs quality of work isn't going to go anywhere good. If he or she wishes to post in the galleries for C&C, then great. If not...

...then stick to the topic of the OP bashing an unknown facebook photographer. Roger.

Why even allow these types of discussions at all?

 

[Derrel]

Yeah, there is no need to actually see one sub-par bunch of photos to discuss the issue. There are plenty of so-called FB professionals whose work comes to mind. We can discuss the issue without the need to locate and focus in on one,specific person's work. There are,again, 350 million images PER DAY hitting Facebook, according to the KPCB annual report on internet trends and behaviors. The whole idea is that 'somebody' is posting not-so-great stuff and "touting" it. And, you know, that's his right. And, people can "Like" his images, or even "Share" them on FB if they wish...nothing wrong with that.

I see this as a sort of philosophical debate (although that might be giving it more importance than it merits) about the current state of photography and social media...this is kind of a new topic, relatively speaking...prior to the internet age, we had "gatekeepers" (editors,publishers,curators,and so on) who controlled what was seen and disseminated. Today...we have much less of that, and instead of good,proven,filtered content, there is just a FLOOD of images, every day, from all directions.

We do not need to bash one single FB photog...there are hundreds of thousands of the same kind of shooter...this is a bonafide trend in today's internet age.

 

[amolitor]

It has brought home to me, at any rate, that the gatekeepers have not necessarily been serving US all that well. They have a lot of criteria they need to meet that haven't got much to do with whether the work is any good, although in general they'll take good work over bad all else being equal.

The question of "what is good anyways" remains open.

 

[nycphotography]

I see this as a sort of philosophical debate (although that might be giving it more importance than it merits) about the current state of photography and social media...this is kind of a new topic, relatively speaking...prior to the internet age, we had "gatekeepers" (editors,publishers,curators,and so on) who controlled what was seen and disseminated. Today...we have much less of that, and instead of good,proven,filtered content, there is just a FLOOD of images, every day, from all directions.

Consider this... "the internet" was supposed to be the great democratization of ideas... and yet I see more concentration of power and control on the internet than EVER BEFORE. Huh? consider Google vs. a newspaper and a network of libraries in every town... each with slightly different collections and focus. Consider Amazon vs dozens of small shops per town. consider EBAY and Craigslist vs every local newspaper and "tradin' paper" classified. So now we Google, Amazon, EBay and Craigslist instead of hundreds or even thousands of regional and local outlets.

Learning from history, I think we will re-experience sort of the same thing that happened first with the printing press and again with the mass media in the 19th and early 20th century.

All of a sudden, "everyone" could just print and distribute whatever they wanted. Quality went to s*** and people were sold all sorts of cockamamie ideas and even snake oil. Little by little, laws were passed to weed out the snake oil, and reputations were built on reputable channels, and we ended up back with stable, high quality (relatively at least) media channels.

People knew were to go for stuff they could believe (ny times, macmillan press) and where to go for outlandish stuff to laugh at (enquirer, ny post, and that nut at the gun show giving out flyers.... or pretty much anyone giving out flyers whatever the venue).

I think little by little good electronic media channels will build "reputations" and use them to build empires, and the crap will be left somewhat behind.

I just haven't figured out by what mechanism these reputation and channels will be built and maintained. I just know that eventually they will. Oh, will they ever.