worst fauxtographer ever?

[The_Traveler]

a win for the good guys.

 

[LaFoto]

I think as a competent photographer you are qualified to judge other people's tastes in these matters. You know the craft and what makes the final product good or bad. And let's face it, some measures of photography are clearly objective: proper exposure vs. blown light and dark areas, for example. So, yes, you can say that someone has poor taste in photography if they prefer bad photos. Of course, whether or not you tell people their taste is lacking is another matter.

I'm not thinking of the person's taste who takes these photos, much rather that of the potential clients.
But as you can see in my discussion with "Bitter", sometimes people simply canNOT choose any more. They need to go for "low cost" (so I need not say "cheap").

Though I should add that everyone (!) still has the option NOT to buy ANY of the photos in discussion here.
You're not FORCED to by BAD photos when you can't afford any more.

 

[KmH]

I think it's wrong to post a link like that when the person at that link is not a member so they can participate in the discussion.

There can be no doubt, there are a lot of potential buyers in that market segment. In any market segment, it's buyer beware.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

a win for the good guys.
View attachment 19464

Yes indeed, something you should totally be proud of!

:roll:

 

[IByte]

I don't think there's anything wrong with going down market. Like Bitter Jeweler suggests, McDonald's is quite successful.

Nobody really wants to admit to being McDonald's, but I don't think there's anything wrong with it. There's even a marketing campaign built right in:

"Considering having your brother Darryl shoot your wedding?"
"Hire us instead, Not Your Brother Photographic Studios. You'll be surprised at how inexpensive we are."
"(if you're my brother, Jim, or my sister, Alice, don't bother calling me, ok?"

Yeah but at least have some background in PP. Even just the basic understanding of the whole triangle...crap spring for cliff notes!

 

[pixmedic]

I think it's wrong to post a link like that when the person at that link is not a member so they can participate in the discussion.

There can be no doubt, there are a lot of potential buyers in that market segment.

are you kidding? thats free advertising! maybe it will drum up some business for her! we might have some members here look at her work and feel they have to go hire her!

 

[LaFoto]

Why would you say so, Keith?
In Photographic Discussions we can also talk about the works of photographers that have made themselves a name and they are not members and cannot participate.
This person has gone into public with her photos, is advertising their work, and must therefore be open to public critiquing, I think.

 

[12sndsgood]

diffrent people like diffrent things, should i start making fun of people profile pictuers because i feel that they have poor taste in clothing? I have peole here at work who have pictures of there kids printed out on a black and white copier paper hanging on there boards at work. not everyone wants high end photos and not everyone chooses to spend a lot of money on photos.

And I really hope this site doesn't start posting all these sites of poor photographers to riducle them. that would just be seriously low class.

 

[IByte]

I'm not thinking of the person's taste who takes these photos, much rather that of the potential clients.
But as you can see in my discussion with "Bitter", sometimes people simply canNOT choose any more. They need to go for "low cost" (so I need not say "cheap").

Though I should add that everyone (!) still has the option NOT to buy ANY of the photos in discussion here.
You're not FORCED to by BAD photos when you can't afford any more.

Yeah but if you want low cost go to one of those Walmart studios or something.

 

[amolitor]

Why would you say so, Keith?
In Photographic Discussions we can also talk about the works of photographers that have made themselves a name and they are not members and cannot participate.
This person has gone into public with her photos, is advertising their work, and must therefore be open to public critiquing, I think.

It's one thing to actually discuss some work, it's quite another to simply mock the work and the person who made it.

 

[cgipson1]

Why would you say so, Keith?
In Photographic Discussions we can also talk about the works of photographers that have made themselves a name and they are not members and cannot participate.
This person has gone into public with her photos, is advertising their work, and must therefore be open to public critiquing, I think.

I have to go with Corinna on this one...

 

[pixmedic]

Why would you say so, Keith?
In Photographic Discussions we can also talk about the works of photographers that have made themselves a name and they are not members and cannot participate.
This person has gone into public with her photos, is advertising their work, and must therefore be open to public critiquing, I think.

It's one thing to actually discuss some work, it's quite another to simply mock the work and the person who made it.

you mean like a lot of the C&C here?

 

[LaFoto]

It's one thing to actually discuss some work, it's quite another to simply mock the work and the person who made it.

Well, I hope it can be seen that I try to discuss the work (or much rather the fact that apparently work like this sells, too) and try not to ridicule the person behind it. I don't even know that person!
It's just that seeing the work she offers FOR SALE makes my hair stand on edge... I must admit it.

 

[paigew]

I think it's wrong to post a link like that when the person at that link is not a member so they can participate in the discussion.

There can be no doubt, there are a lot of potential buyers in that market segment. In any market segment, it's buyer beware.

Agreed. If this person posted her images here then it is 'fair game' so to speak. But to seek out her images/website for the sole purpose of making fun of her is mean spirited, ugly, and hurtful.

I really do not understand why members of this forum get so much pleasure by demeaning or bullying others. As artists we should be here to critique, encourage, and inspire each other. Instead this forum can only provide hurtful non helpful opinions.

 

[cgipson1]

diffrent people like diffrent things, should i start making fun of people profile pictuers because i feel that they have poor taste in clothing? I have peole here at work who have pictures of there kids printed out on a black and white copier paper hanging on there boards at work. not everyone wants high end photos and not everyone chooses to spend a lot of money on photos.

And I really hope this site doesn't start posting all these sites of poor photographers to riducle them. that would just be seriously low class.

Buddy.... SPELL CHECK!!! (And you have been doing much better, btw!)