Top 10 Most Annoying Photo Critiques

[Kerbouchard]

I say find good ones for you to keep. I am giving CC of photos they share? Sigh... whatever dude. Keep editing those stupid shots that do nothing for your portfolio.

So let me get what you're saying straight Schwetty:

You're saying that after you pull the shots you want from the second shooter (if you're the first shooter), you're obviously 'releasing' the rest of the second shooter's photos to him/her? And then giving feedback on which ones that the second shooter would want to work on processing for their portfolio?

Or are you saying you don't use the second shooter's photos at all, and the second shooter is only there for help/to gain experience?

I think either is fine, just trying to get straight what you're saying.

Neither. He is the second shooter, and he is only looking for shots that improve his portfolio.

 

[Robin Usagani]

OK, lets say I second shoot and I took 900 shots. I go through the shots real quick and only edit the ones I want for my portfolio & blog (that are portfolio and blog worthy). I gave all 900 RAW files to my main shooter for him/her to edit.


As a main shooter, I let my 2nd shooter use whatever he/she wants for her portfolio or marketing material.

I say find good ones for you to keep. I am giving CC of photos they share? Sigh... whatever dude. Keep editing those stupid shots that do nothing for your portfolio.

So let me get what you're saying straight Schwetty:

You're saying that after you pull the shots you want from the second shooter (if you're the first shooter), you're obviously 'releasing' the rest of the second shooter's photos to him/her? And then giving feedback on which ones that the second shooter would want to work on processing for their portfolio?

Or are you saying you don't use the second shooter's photos at all, and the second shooter is only there for help/to gain experience?

I think either is fine, just trying to get straight what you're saying.

 

[fjrabon]

I say find good ones for you to keep. I am giving CC of photos they share? Sigh... whatever dude. Keep editing those stupid shots that do nothing for your portfolio.

So let me get what you're saying straight Schwetty:

You're saying that after you pull the shots you want from the second shooter (if you're the first shooter), you're obviously 'releasing' the rest of the second shooter's photos to him/her? And then giving feedback on which ones that the second shooter would want to work on processing for their portfolio?

Or are you saying you don't use the second shooter's photos at all, and the second shooter is only there for help/to gain experience?

I think either is fine, just trying to get straight what you're saying.

Neither. He is the second shooter, and he is only looking for shots that improve his portfolio.

No, he's clearly made comments about being on both sides of the equation. His original comment, that started this whole kerfuffle was him saying he gives comments to his second shooter about wether or not a shot is a keeper or not. Or at least that is how I took it.

And who gives a crap if a photographer is only shooting for his or her portfolio? I'd much rather a person be putting that level of care into every shot, that they're hoping to use it as a portfolio shot, that probably means they're doing their best on every shot to get it there. If a wedding set has several portfolio grade shots, then that's going to be a pretty awesome wedding set most of the time.

 

[Robin Usagani]

Wow.. i have a personal assistant to reply for me. I main shoot too George. I also 2nd shoot for several photographers (4 so far) multiple times. Obviously I am doing something right.

I say find good ones for you to keep. I am giving CC of photos they share? Sigh... whatever dude. Keep editing those stupid shots that do nothing for your portfolio.

So let me get what you're saying straight Schwetty:

You're saying that after you pull the shots you want from the second shooter (if you're the first shooter), you're obviously 'releasing' the rest of the second shooter's photos to him/her? And then giving feedback on which ones that the second shooter would want to work on processing for their portfolio?

Or are you saying you don't use the second shooter's photos at all, and the second shooter is only there for help/to gain experience?

I think either is fine, just trying to get straight what you're saying.

Neither. He is the second shooter, and he is only looking for shots that improve his portfolio.

 

[Robin Usagani]

My original post was saying about people posting on this forum as 2nd shooter asking for CC. Not my 2nd shooter.

So let me get what you're saying straight Schwetty:

You're saying that after you pull the shots you want from the second shooter (if you're the first shooter), you're obviously 'releasing' the rest of the second shooter's photos to him/her? And then giving feedback on which ones that the second shooter would want to work on processing for their portfolio?

Or are you saying you don't use the second shooter's photos at all, and the second shooter is only there for help/to gain experience?

I think either is fine, just trying to get straight what you're saying.

Neither. He is the second shooter, and he is only looking for shots that improve his portfolio.

No, he's clearly made comments about being on both sides of the equation. His original comment, that started this whole kerfuffle was him saying he gives comments to his second shooter about wether or not a shot is a keeper or not. Or at least that is how I took it.

And who gives a crap if a photographer is only shooting for his or her portfolio? I'd much rather a person be putting that level of care into every shot, that they're hoping to use it as a portfolio shot, that probably means they're doing their best on every shot to get it there. If a wedding set has several portfolio grade shots, then that's going to be a pretty awesome wedding set most of the time.

 

[jowensphoto]

That's the fastest I've ever seen a thread veer completely off topic.

 

[fjrabon]

My original post was saying about people posting on this forum as 2nd shooter asking for CC. Not my 2nd shooter.

Neither. He is the second shooter, and he is only looking for shots that improve his portfolio.

No, he's clearly made comments about being on both sides of the equation. His original comment, that started this whole kerfuffle was him saying he gives comments to his second shooter about wether or not a shot is a keeper or not. Or at least that is how I took it.

And who gives a crap if a photographer is only shooting for his or her portfolio? I'd much rather a person be putting that level of care into every shot, that they're hoping to use it as a portfolio shot, that probably means they're doing their best on every shot to get it there. If a wedding set has several portfolio grade shots, then that's going to be a pretty awesome wedding set most of the time.

ah ok.

 

[Robin Usagani]

That's the fastest I've ever seen a thread veer completely off topic.

When both Schwetty and Kerby reply, it is bound to happen.

 

[o hey tyler]

lol at the speed and ferocity at which Schwetty's response was misunderstood and than misconstrued in a good ol' fashioned "NO, YOU'RE WRONG AND YOU SHOULD SHUT YOUR FACE" kind of way.

Nice work to all that were involved. :thumbup: You should be proud.

 

[mishele]

Good times!! lol

 

[tirediron]

OKAY EVERYONE - Let's try and re-rail this thread and stick to the topic. Any continuation of this current trend will result in a padlock being put on.

Thanks!

 

[mishele]

I read paddle instead of padlock......lol

 

[manaheim]

The most annoying is no comment at all, which happens very often posting on here.

^This! I always make a point to comment on the "5000 views, 0 replies" threads. I've had a few lately myself; I must say, it's a bit disheartening.

Why people get annoyed by this blows my mind.

No comment at all IS a comment in and of itself.

It is a comment that says... simply... "No comment".

Take it to heart.

 

[jowensphoto]

"I like it"
"I don't like it"

 

[rexbobcat]

I'm not sure I agree with the #2, but the others seem pretty reasonable lol
It just opens the door for delusions, I think.

"I saturated it like that on purpose. It's artistic. You just don't understand my style."
"Her skin is orange and it looks like you broke a green glowstick and splattered it all over the trees. Why?"

That's a question I don't think is asked enough. I think it should be mandatory in order to better critique a photo to state in the first post WHY you did it like this, or WHY you processed it like this. It makes it so much easier.