Pet hates?

DaireQuinlan

peter1892 wrote: »

I'm going into the garden to eat worms

That'd be those owls all right. Little feckers.

humberklog

Self portraits of the photographer's eye.

dazftw

humberklog wrote: »

Self portraits of the photographer's eye.

Thats a good one now.. I'm ashamed to say I done this when I 1st got into photography...

**** THIS WAS 5 YEARS AGO NEXT WEDNESDAY SO DON'T JUDGE ME****



oh cringe :pac:

VisionaryP

Selective colouring - muppetry of the highest order
Watermarks on bad photography - learn how to take photos worth stealing before you start watermarking
Endless photos of inanimate objects - it's not art, it's boredom
Crooked horizons - lazy feckers
Extreme shallow DOF for the sake of it - dude, it's your lens, it doesn't make you an artist

dazftw

dazftw wrote: »

Thats a good one now.. I'm ashamed to say I done this when I 1st got into photography...

**** THIS WAS 5 YEARS AGO NEXT WEDNESDAY SO DON'T JUDGE ME****

oh cringe :pac:

I quite like that picture, actually. Although the eye doesn't look very optimistic. You look knackered, to be honest.


I don't think I have any pet hates, though I am still very early on in the 'ol beginner stages.

I suppose, I like DOF and panning and stuff, but I don't like when the photographer didn't use DOF or didn't pan, but decides to try to add that effect later in post-processing.

I haven't personally done anything really in the ways of selective colouring or HDR or anything (i have a photo of a Local Policia Car that I used selective colouring on, but it was more just to try my hand at it than anything else).

Haven't done HDR because I can't seem to. Take the shots, use some software etc but my photos always end up looking the same

Anyway, my point is that I don't see this kinda stuff as a pet hate because it's a learning curve, really, isn't it?

Take Achtungbarry, for example. He has been doing HDR for ages. He's moving on to some thing else now, which is all grand. He might never do a HDR again, but he knows now that if someone ever wants him to do one, or if he is in a location and thinks "this'd make a great HDR", he knows he is capable of doing it, which, to me, seems to be the purpose behind doing all the gimmicky stuff in the first place.


Though i suppose if I had to pick out a pet hate, the one that'd bug me most is watermarks on photographs (note; not on "bad" photos, because though I may not like a photo, others may love it), but I think watermarks are annoying in general. I understand why people use them, but they just annoy me a little.

charybdis

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't think I have any pet hates, though I am still very early on in the 'ol beginner stages.

I suppose, I like DOF and panning and stuff, but I don't like when the photographer didn't use DOF or didn't pan, but decides to try to add that effect later in post-processing.

I haven't personally done anything really in the ways of selective colouring or HDR or anything (i have a photo of a Local Policia Car that I used selective colouring on, but it was more just to try my hand at it than anything else).

Haven't done HDR because I can't seem to. Take the shots, use some software etc but my photos always end up looking the same

Anyway, my point is that I don't see this kinda stuff as a pet hate because it's a learning curve, really, isn't it?

Take Achtungbarry, for example. He has been doing HDR for ages. He's moving on to some thing else now, which is all grand. He might never do a HDR again, but he knows now that if someone ever wants him to do one, or if he is in a location and thinks "this'd make a great HDR", he knows he is capable of doing it, which, to me, seems to be the purpose behind doing all the gimmicky stuff in the first place.

I disagree. I think they're a learning dead end.

HDR/tonemapping is not an essential part of photography.
Selective colour/desaturation is not an essential part of photography.

Arguably, they could be used in service of a photographic end, but they're not the sort of thing someone learning the fundamentals of photography should be engaging in. HDR inhibits an understanding of exposure and dynamic range. Selective colour inhibits understanding colour theory and learning how to compose pictures in colour. They're not good ideas for people learning photography because they become crutches; gimmicks they come to rely upon instead of understanding the subtleties of their craft.

List of pet hates addenda:

• When people give photographs a trite or punny title often based on a popular phrase or lyric; it's fine sometimes, but some people seem compelled to try to give every image a snappy title.
• "DOF" and general depth-of-field confusion and misuse of terms.
• "Bokeh".

thecommander

Captioning photos with something other than their location or actual subject, trying to have some sort of "meaning"

melekalikimaka

thecommander wrote: »

Captioning photos with something other than their location or actual subject, trying to have some sort of "meaning"

I'd be the opposite, why give the obvious, why not put the image into context. i much rather reading the why over the what and where

charybdis

melekalikimaka wrote: »

I'd be the opposite, why give the obvious, why not put the image into context. i much rather reading the why over the what and where

I dunno, I think some people are prone to relying too heavily on image titles or captions for context when they should be focused on communicating their ideas through the image instead of propping them up with a written cue.

I mean, which would be better: "Making a Splash", or "Behind the Gare Saint-Lazare"?

DaireQuinlan

charybdis wrote: »

I dunno, I think some people are prone to relying too heavily on image titles or captions for context when they should be focused on communicating their ideas through the image instead of propping them up with a written cue.

every situation is different. The example I bring up whenever people insist that the images ought to stand entirely by themselves and not rely on captions or context is 'innocent landscapes'. Taken by themselves the images aren't particularly stand outish, taken in context they become magnetising in their seeming banality.

I mean, which would be better: "Making a Splash", or "Behind the Gare Saint-Lazare"?

charybdis

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

every situation is different. The example I bring up whenever people insist that the images ought to stand entirely by themselves and not rely on captions or context is 'innocent landscapes'. Taken by themselves the images aren't particularly stand outish, taken in context they become magnetising in their seeming banality.

I agree with this. There are times when a caption or title can significantly add to an image, but often in these cases the art itself is in the juxtaposition of the title and the image. What I was referring to earlier was titles to which the juxtaposition is unimportant and are just there to sound snappy or reference some clichéd phrase used bluntly and unironically. Think "tabloid newspaper punny caption for its own sake" as opposed to an actual effort to recontextualise or give new meaning to an image.

humberklog

I really hate the way photography can expose your own stupidity for all the world to see.

This after a rather embarassing lunchtime thinking I could turn my coat into a dark room and re-feed a very important roll of film back into the spool that my brute force had pulled it from when at the end of the roll.

Pet hate: Stupid cameras making me do stupid things in public.

ThOnda

achtungbarry wrote: »

....
But I'm cured..... I swear.

You were on the edge of being unfollowed, honestly. But it's nice to see you are coming back to your senses

pete4130

Wow. I ignored this thread for days thinking it would be the usual mundane stuff. Turns out it was really quite entertaining!

Thanks!

my pet hates are:

-Anything shot on any camera system other than Nikon.

-Anything shot on any 3rd party lenses.

-Anything post processed on anything other than an Apple computer.

Salmon Leap

1) HDR (especially when it's overdone).

2) "Camera Snobbery" (example I was in the Phoenix Park last Sunday taking some shots when I happened across 2 others (man and woman) doing the same. I gave a brief polite "Hi!", she responded politely but he looked at my camera (a mere Sony superzoom, not like the DSLR with zoom lens he had (super kit by the way!), turned his nose up and grunted.

thefizz

When I'm asked why I haven't "gone digital".

pete4130

thefizz wrote: »

When I'm asked why I haven't "gone digital".

if your posting images on line then you already have gone digital.

stcstc

Actually

why havent you, :D:D:D:D:D:D:D

smelltheglove

People asking you how much their camera is worth without knowing what camera it is!:mad: I spent about 30 mns telling someone the other night, look I cant tell you without seeing the camera repeatedly and him telling me sure it looks like yours and it has those lenses that you twist around too!

Crispin

Whining photographers!


*runs for cover*

theboat

I showed some friends a bunch of photos I'd taken of them recently (shot on film, incidentally) and the first reaction to the shots was "wow, your camera takes great photos"... *sighs*

Teferi

People looking at you strange as you take pictures.

magicbastarder

People looking at you as you take strange pictures.

DaireQuinlan

magicbastarder wrote: »

People looking at you as you take strange pictures.

Strange people taking your pictures as you look at them.

TinyExplosions

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

Strange people taking your pictures as you look at them.

Strange pictures being looked at by people you're taking

Nisio

TinyExplosions wrote: »

Strange pictures being looked at by people you're taking

Looking strange at people as you take pictures :eek:


(my real pet hate is cleaning glass.)

Teferi

This has turned very silly indeed [/python]

thefly

Selective coulor
Swans
Homeless people
Flower petals
Pets
Kids
Wedding photos and photographers
Close up of babies feet
People that say "photogs" instead of photographers or any abriviated version of photographer for that matter
Pentax/Sony/Tamron
Lanscapes
Sunsets
Sunrises
Post Production
Moany Clients
Forgetting monopod or any other piece of equipment
Fake borders
Film Frames
Anything naff

Thecageyone

This 'tog' likes Kids, swans and wouldn't turn his nose up at the right Tamron :P

I hate not having the money to buy all the nicies I want!

thefly

Thecageyone wrote: »

This 'tog' likes Kids, swans and wouldn't turn his nose up at the right Tamron :P

I hate not having the money to buy all the nicies I want!

Good thing you like Tamron then

Thecageyone

I actually sold a Tamron recently because it gave horrible purple fringing when used on the longer end. But, I'd not say no to one like this:

http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-17-50mm-Aspherical-Digital-Cameras/dp/B000EXR0SI

Of course I'd prefer a Nikon, but there's probably a more significant difference in price difference than IQ.

thefly

Dont mind me I'm just been a moany sh1te

I'm actually just a Canon snob

Looks like a nice little lens

Thecageyone

I'm a 'whatever I can afford at the time' Type of guy

And just noticed I linked the Canon version by mistake

I can't even afford that one right now. I hate not having money

Taseera

Bad manners, noisy eaters, nose pickers, fingernail biters, tappers, stutterers, people who use the pronoun I, I, I all the time, people who butt in line, people in the restroom who don't wash their hands after they've used the toilet, people who tinkle on the toilet seat, people who don't flush, waiters who don't know which side to serve or which side to clear, food servers who fiddle with their hair, hairdressers who pick their face while working on your hair, waitstaff who say, "Are you still working on that?" and cashiers who say, "Are you all set?" People who only talk about themselves and their problems.

humberklog

The new route to photography that the technical age has brought:
Buy camera.
Make Website offering services and stills*
Learn to take (mediocre) shots.



*this is a pet hate on its own in one of those inflated sense of one's ability gicksites.

Thecageyone

No worse than selling on the street thinking your stuff is good enough though, eh? :P

Luckilly I've been shooting for almost 30 years now, think I had my first camera when I was around 6 - SO i don't fall into that category. Always loved shooting and composing, always been a bit arty. Always wanted to learn more.

I did more:

Grew up using P&S film cams, always had at least one at any one time in my life - When digital became affordable: Bought a camera, bought another, and another [a million fuji compacts later] ... bought one with manual controls ... learned as much as i could within it's limitations - bought Dslr to move up a step ... Bought a better dslr ... Have offered my services as people keep asking but to date have only sold a few prints ... Not interested in th money, which would be nice, but just love taking pictures. Maybe a lot of those who buy camera, make web site, have been through similar, they just don't harp on about all the years they spent shooting [film] as a kid?

Hate people who refuse to acknowledge obvious talent and rather whore their own stuff for praise than be helpful. That's pretty general, see it all the time on flickr and Pix and those kinda sites ...

mehfesto

thefly wrote: »

Selective coulor
Swans
Homeless people
Flower petals
Pets
Kids
Wedding photos and photographers
Close up of babies feet
People that say "photogs" instead of photographers or any abriviated version of photographer for that matter
Pentax/Sony/Tamron
Lanscapes
Sunsets
Sunrises
Post Production
Moany Clients
Forgetting monopod or any other piece of equipment
Fake borders
Film Frames
Anything naff

What, all of them/it in general?!

I agree with most the others, mind.

Thecageyone

If you really hate all that lot, best just shoot film, and only moody/bleak/washy coloured 'street' and candid shots ... while you sit alone outside cafés trying to hide your lens as you grumble at passers by. It's back in fashion seemingly

charybdis

• Excessive and misused ellipses.

Thecageyone wrote: »

Hate people who refuse to acknowledge obvious talent and rather whore their own stuff for praise than be helpful.

Ahem.

Thecageyone

charybdis wrote: »

• Excessive and misused ellipses.

Ahem.

I wasn't talking about myself. Why don't you learn to Quote less selectively? I notice it all the time on Flickr, as I said. And NOT regarding my images. I've never gotten a bad comment on there, not a one :P

People who only 'think' they're clever ... .......... And have unpronounceable names.

charybdis

• "Quotation mark" abuse

It's pronounced "kəˈrɪbdɨs".

humberklog

Thecageyone wrote: »

No worse than selling on the street thinking your stuff is good enough though, eh? :P

Luckilly I've been shooting for almost 30 years now

No, much worse. Selling photos on the street gives an open market. Firstly there are actual photos. 2ndly if they're no good they won't sell. If they are good they will sell.

Web sites by dickwad chancers are nothing more than carts carrying shelves of nothing and sold by snake oilmen. Pig in a poke etc. Sneeky slithery chancers lacking any backbone of committment to what they say or snap in photography are pet hate of mine.

I thought in quite a lot of posts you say you are new to photography.

Thecageyone

charybdis wrote: »

• "Quotation mark" abuse

It's pronounced "kəˈrɪbdɨs".

I was saying Char-e-bidis in my head

I am new to photography in a sense, as in, actually learning the controls, techniques, skills needed etc ... [I think ellipsis is correct this time?]

Doesn't mean I haven't been happy snapping and composing shots for years. I just never took it seriously. Some might say i still don't

humberklog

Thecageyone wrote: »

I was saying Char-e-bidis in my head

I am new to photography in a sense, as in, actually learning the controls, techniques, skills needed etc ... [I think ellipsis is correct this time?]

Doesn't mean I haven't been happy snapping and composing shots for years. I just never took it seriously. Some might say i still don't

30 years you said in previous post.

Oh enough...back to completely ignoring you.

Thecageyone

humberklog wrote: »

30 years you said in previous post.

Oh enough...back to completely ignoring you.

30 years of shooting - yes. And? That doesn't make it 'photography' - as in actually doing it proper. Get it now? I'm 34, have had cameras since I was around 6. Nobody ever taught me anything photography-wise. I never bothered with manual control up until about 2 years ago.

Your last line just shows your childishness, typical. You only quote me to nit-pick then? :rolleyes:

To bring it back on topic:

Hate when you get new gear and nobody wants to pose for you

thefly

mehfesto wrote: »

What, all of them/it in general?!

I agree with most the others, mind.

Most landscapes are very clichéd and I put post production down because before you know it it's 4am


Actually I'm adding another..............any clichés

ender ender

I hate when professional photographers have crappy websites that are ugly or difficult to navigate,
I hate Canon v's Nikon jokes, especially when people that I meet on a regular basis are still making them years later.
I hate the attitude that artists/art photographers are all pretensious, lazy conmen/women.
And i hate internet forum arguments: c'mon guys, give each other a big hug! Life's too short...

Thecageyone

ender ender wrote: »

I hate when professional photographers have crappy websites that are ugly or difficult to navigate,
I hate Canon v's Nikon jokes, especially when people that I meet on a regular basis are still making them years later.
I hate the attitude that artists/art photographers are all pretensious, lazy conmen/women.
And i hate internet forum arguments: c'mon guys, give each other a big hug! Life's too short...

I couldn't hate anyone I've never met, these guys that do the winding up on here, in the end, only wind themselves I'm butter baby!

I hate the Canon V Nikon thing. It was never funny, it's just irritating, and I thought that back when i used Fuji, and then Sony ... and now Nikon. Photographers can be so up themselves it's not even remotely funny. I hate the ones who talk about nothing but gear yet their images are dull as dishwater.

I also hate cliques. And you'll get them everywhere. I do wonder if they have meetings in the real world to discuss how to all come across exactly the same?

DaireQuinlan

Thecageyone wrote: »

I also hate cliques. And you'll get them everywhere. I do wonder if they have meetings in the real world to discuss how to all come across exactly the same?

People who think there are cliques wherever they go but in reality are just so abrasive, argumentative, rude, and occasionally downright offensive that everyone just plain dislikes them.

Thecageyone

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

People who think there are cliques wherever they go but in reality are just so abrasive, argumentative, rude, and occasionally downright offensive that everyone just plain dislikes them.

Funny, I keep looking back over my post and don't see where you're mentioned

paranoid much? :P

I know cliques when I see them though, but I didn't suggest I meant on here. There's a whole world outside boards photography y'know?

I'm not rude, or offensive. I take offense to you trying to make out I am, as you know nothing about me in "reality". I could name on one hand the wee group who'd agree strongly with you on your slanderous remarks. Usual group - not saying clique mind

The rest, maybe a little. But hey, it's teh internets. If you think people are exactly as they come across in a few posts online, you may let go of the late 90's.