First shots with 60D Audi q7 a5, Mercedes SLS c&c

[Ballistics]

Sorry hrry about your thread.

Some of us come to here to post well-thought-out commentary on your images. Others come to post inflammatory comments to get their jollies off *cough Ballistics *cough.

You are the definition of a hypocrite. I try to digress, yet you keep instigating the situation by calling me a troll (Talk about not making sense). You are getting all bent out of shape over the fact that someone called these images "professional". You are carrying on like a little child. I told you to get over it, but you suddenly make this entire thing about how I am somehow trolling. You are posting inflammatory remarks not me. You are the one calling people names, harassing others for not having the same standards as you, and crying over semantics. Get over yourself and stop being so confrontational about everything.

You are complaining about the composition and underexposure of the first image which you deem is not of professional quality. The image I linked of the same/similar car which is also underexposed, and the composition isn't favorable.

The term professional quality is subjective. Just like photography and art are subjective. You are losing it over the fact that people don't share the same standards and that, my friend, is silly.

If the fact that someone uses the term "professional" loosely "rubs you the wrong way", you need to take a break and get some fresh air. The only troll in this thread, is you.

 

[Majeed Badizadegan]

Ballistics has finally arrived to the party.

So, I suppose deeming you a troll is entirely baseless given you come into a thread completely innocent just minding your own business? Am I right?

I think you are investing to much emotion into nothing at all. Let it go.

Enlighten me, after I've clearly spent time explaining the reasoning behind my statements in a civil manner, how is this not a trollish statement from you?

You are the definition of a hypocrite. I try to digress, yet you keep instigating the situation by calling me a troll (Talk about not making sense). You are getting all bent out of shape over the fact that someone called these images "professional". You are carrying on like a little child. I told you to get over it, but you suddenly make this entire thing about how I am somehow trolling. You are posting inflammatory remarks not me. You are the one calling people names, harassing others for not having the same standards as you, and crying over semantics. Get over yourself and stop being so confrontational about everything.

why don't you hop off the high horse and take a big step back for a sec. Who started all of this? Did I come into a thread you were posting in and post an antagonistic comment towards you? No.

You are complaining about the composition and underexposure of the first image which you deem is not of professional quality. The image I linked of the same/similar car which is also underexposed, and the composition isn't favorable.

For illustrative purposes, I will bring in the image you've provided. Mods, if it's not okay for me to link, feel free to remove:

First and foremost, this image is not "underexposed". Just because the image has a black background and is contrasty does not = underexposure. Almost all important detail is visible in the shadows. My only complaint would be the interior could be slightly better lit.

The lighting is dynamic and extremely flattering on the vehicle.

The composition that you say is lacking is actually quite flattering to the vehicle, it accentuates the winged-doors, and it follows the rule of thirds. Furthermore, there is no distracting background or elements of the image that take away focus from the main subject. The shot was taken almost at ground level to bring more prominence to the vehicle. Even the angle of the grain on the cement serves as a leading line to the eye towards the vehicle. A professional image indeed.

So, it would seem you are wrong on both counts.

The term professional quality is subjective. Just like photography and art is subjective. You are losing it over the fact that people don't share the same standards and that, my friend, is silly.

If the fact that someone uses the term "professional" loosely "rubs you the wrong way", you need to take a break and get some fresh air. The only troll in this thread, is you.

That's your opinion. My opinion is the term "professional" is reserved for what is actually professional. Or at the very least has enough elements of professionalism to warrant it to be compared to something of professional quality.

We also need to address the medium upon which these comments have been made. If it's your Facebook page who gives a rats @$$ what anyone says there? Friends and family can say your image is the most professional thing they've ever set eyes upon. But on a photography forum where there is a huge number of experienced photographers and even some true professional photographers among us, to say something is "very professional" when it is not, is in poor taste and offensive.

 

[Ballistics]

Ballistics has finally arrived to the party.

So, I suppose deeming you a troll is entirely baseless given you come into a thread completely innocent just minding your own business? Am I right?

I said nothing inflammatory, nothing insulting, nothing controversial. I simply said that you are devoting too much into something trivial and to let it go.

Enlighten me, after I've clearly spent time explaining the reasoning behind my statements in a civil manner, how is this not a trollish statement from you?

Maybe you'll learn a thing or two if you open your mind and close your mouth?

So, this is totally civil and acceptable way of addressing an individual right? This isn't inflammatory at all right?

why don't you hop off the high horse and take a big step back for a sec. Who started all of this? Did I come into a thread you were posting in and post an antagonistic comment towards you? No.

High horse? You're the one being attacked? Again, you are being a hypocrite. You can post antagonistic comments to others, but when done to you it's blasphemy.

First and foremost, this image is not "underexposed". Just because the image has a black background and is contrasty does not = underexposure. Almost all important detail is visible in the shadows. My only complaint would be the interior could be slightly better lit.

The interior, as well as the entire side skirt of the car is underexposed.

The composition that you say is lacking is actually quite flattering to the vehicle, it accentuates the winged-doors, and it follows the rule of thirds. Furthermore, there is no distracting background or elements of the image that take away focus from the main subject. The shot was taken almost at ground level to bring more prominence to the vehicle. Even the angle of the grain on the cement serves as a leading line to the eye towards the vehicle. A professional image indeed.

The angle of the car is not flattering, the ad says "Two wings" yet only has one door raised.

So, it would seem you are wrong on both counts.

How could I be wrong based on opinion, which you partially agree on?

The term professional quality is subjective. Just like photography and art is subjective. You are losing it over the fact that people don't share the same standards and that, my friend, is silly.

If the fact that someone uses the term "professional" loosely "rubs you the wrong way", you need to take a break and get some fresh air. The only troll in this thread, is you.

That's your opinion. My opinion is the term "professional" is reserved for what is actually professional. Or at the very least has enough elements of professionalism to warrant it to be compared to something of professional quality.

Which is obviously open to interpretation. Terms like love, happiness, fun, nice, freedom, fall into the same category. All are opened to interpretation... just like the term professional. You cannot categorize the term professional under one circumstance. It's not concrete. This is semantic babble regardless.

We also need to address the medium upon which these comments have been made. If it's your Facebook page who gives a rats @$$ what anyone says there? Friends and family can say your image is the most professional thing they've ever set eyes upon. But on a photography forum where there is a huge number of experienced photographers and even some true professional photographers among us, to say something is "very professional" when it is not, is in poor taste and offensive.

Again... offensive is subjective. In my opinion, you are being over dramatic, hypocritical, overly sensitive, and confrontational.

What part makes #1 look professional? The stack of safety cones on the right side of the frame? Or the fact that it's underexposed?

What part makes #5 look professional? The fact that every important part piece of the image is either cropped to tight (tire, headlight) or out of focus (vehicle brand)?

This is confrontational, or "trolling" as you put it.
If you are taking offense to someone using the term professional, I suggest you stay off the forums. At least the beginner's section, because clearly all of us beginners do not share the same standards that you do, and you are bound to be offended on a daily basis. Are you even a professional yourself?

 

[Vtec44]

I think they're good photos. However IMHO, the distracting background and cropping ruined them.

 

[Majeed Badizadegan]

I said nothing inflammatory, nothing insulting, nothing controversial. I simply said that you are devoting too much into something trivial and to let it go.

Don't buy it.

So, this is totally civil and acceptable way of addressing an individual right? This isn't inflammatory at all right?

You fail to give this message context. He had previously asserted that everyone on this board is a "know-it-all" and is "always right".

High horse? You're the one being attacked? Again, you are being a hypocrite. You can post antagonistic comments to others, but when done to you it's blasphemy.

No, everything I've posted here was reactive.

The interior, as well as the entire side skirt of the car is underexposed.

The skirt is fine and this type of stylistic lighting is common in print ads.

The angle of the car is not flattering, the ad says "Two wings" yet only has one door raised.

The print copy was not taken into consideration when I was evaluating the image. The ad copy is irrelevant when judging the image on its own merits.

How could I be wrong based on opinion, which you partially agree on?

I strongly disagree with your opinion, because it has very little basis given the image you provided. you've just twisted my words to resemble something of partial agreement.

Which is obviously open to interpretation. Terms like love, happiness, fun, nice, freedom, fall into the same category. All are opened to interpretation... just like the term professional. You cannot categorize the term professional under one circumstance. It's not concrete. This is semantic babble regardless.

Talk about semantic babble. This is quite the deviation in itself. If you don't think the term professional carries any weight, and can be tossed around given whatever ones personal preference then we just simply disagree.

Again... offensive is subjective. In my opinion, you are being over dramatic, hypocritical, overly sensitive, and confrontational.

Others in the thread have "liked" what I've had to say indicating agreement with my premise.

You've gained supporters from an earlier post through "likes", one of which is a troll who would probably agree with you if you said the sky was down, so long as it was contradictory to my point.

This is confrontational, or "trolling" as you put it.
If you are taking offense to someone using the term professional, I suggest you stay off the forums. At least the beginner's section, because clearly all of us beginners do not share the same standards that you do, and you are bound to be offended on a daily basis. Are you even a professional yourself?

Context again. The comments where I called into question his attribution of professionalism to images 1, 5 were warranted. Sarcastic? A little. But only due to the fact that his comment was such a deviation from what was true.

Everything I've said has been constructive-minded, to provide OP with thorough feedback to improve his work from. After all, it was his first time out with his new camera. Let's not lose sight of the big picture here.

Whereas you've come into this thread in a troll-like fashion, posting an antagonistic comment as your segway into the conversation. Placing more priority on your antagonistic comment than feedback to his images. So I stand by the fact that I consider this trollish behavior, whether you intended it to be or not.

 

[BastiaanImages]

I think we should concentrate on giving our own opinion without attacking someone else for theirs. An opinion was given but not without a backhanded attack at someone else's opinion. Every one has an opinion and they are entitled to it. JMHO.

Agreed, lets leave it at that

 

[thereyougo!3]

I would agree that the word 'professional' is banded around too much. But let's not get too hung up on it. Banning its use would never work. The important thing is how the OP responds. They are his photos after all. The OP has accepted the C&C in good faith.

As far as the Mercedes ad is concerned, there's a lot of interpretation involved. Technically it's possibly underexposed in places but that was done deliberately for a reason to create a mood. I think they decided not to include the other door because they had decided to put the writing there.

 

[Ballistics]

I think we should concentrate on giving our own opinion without attacking someone else for theirs. An opinion was given but not without a backhanded attack at someone else's opinion. Every one has an opinion and they are entitled to it. JMHO.

Agreed, lets leave it at that

Agreed.

 

[PhillOS]

Phew.. talk about a storm in a cup..