What are some of the things that make you lose all respect for a fellow photographer?
>doesn't own Lightroom or comparable PP software, only shoots JPEG
>mentions that a photo has "creamy, smooth bokeh" unironically
>the only kind of photography they ever do is street photography
>uses the "green box"/full auto mode setting on their DSLRs
>takes more pictures on their cellphone than on their real camera
>>2740290
>doesn't own Lightroom or comparable PP software, only shoots JPEG
Life is too short to shoot raw mate, jpeg is good enough got your snapshits
>mentions that a photo has "creamy, smooth bokeh" unironically
sorry you can't afford anything faster than 1.8
>the only kind of photography they ever do is street photography
streets where its at brah
>uses the "green box"/full auto mode setting on their DSLRs
green for go
>takes more pictures on their cellphone than on their real camera
are you implying a cell phone isn't as real as a 5d mk IV?
>>2740300
How Can Cell Phones Be Real If A Canon 5D Mark IV Isn't Real?
>>2740292
/thread
>>2740292
>implying any photographers post here
>>2740292
ffffff
>>2740290
>uses a superzoom
>uses 'clarity'
>uses m43
>uses a watermark (when they're not professionals; I mean if you're trying to get a business off the ground and want people seeing the photos to know you took them and you're for hire, then why not)
>>2740320
listen here bud clarity is okay to an extent
Literally nothing. Granted, I don't take advice from someone who shoots only auto, but I don't lose respect for them. They can still make great shots, anyone can, with comparatively (to other art forms) minimal practice.
You fucking autist.
I feel like anyone who posts any form of criticism should be obliged to post at least one photo from their PF or something. I mean I agree with OP to some extent but how ironical it would be if OP only shot shitty snapshits, yet felt the right to look down on other photographers.
>>2740332
dude youre a gig shooter, of course you need clarity, the only pp tool you guys know.
>>2740290
>What are some of the things that make you lose all respect for a fellow photographer?
- Spends more time worrying about what other people are doing than just shutting up and making photographs.
- Has no opinions on art or individual photographers but opinionated as fuck about cameras/sensors/manufacturers/software....
Overhand grip on lens.
>>2740290
What exactly does lightroom do that photoshop can't?
I've tried LR out and all I see is basic colour balance tools and a whole bunch of instagram filters.
Am I missing something?
>>2740359
But on /p/ you only get criticized for the EXIF data.
>>2740389
I think he means any raw processing software, not Lightroom specifically.
But to answer your question: With Lightroom you can edit multiple photos in bulk, it's mainly a time saving tool.
>>2740391
What kind of charlatan would bulk edit his photos
You're making individual arts, not running industrial assembly line!
>>2740399
>>2740391
you can bulk edit photos in photoshop's acr too.
only actual difference i've seen is it's harder to pirate lightroom plugins like VSCO. big deal.
>>2740290
posts on /p/ bitching about other people instead of just going and taking pictures
seriously fuck off you bitter little shitheadd
>>2740402
>>2740403
But does Lightroom do anything other than colour correction and filtering?
Or is this just the essence of what it does?
In photoshop you can do many, many things, but so far as I can tell Lightroom has a much more limited range of functionality.
Is this true, or am I completely misunderstanding it?
Wasn't going to post initially as I didn't think anything really triggered me but after a solid minute I can write a novel about this...
Shit-tier
> concert/event/cosplay
Cringe-tier
> maternity/couples
Gearfags are cancer; shitty subject c&c; watermarks; amateurs labelling themselves as pros; overwhelming PS manipulations....list goes on.
I'm aware some of these are hypocritical and are merely different "branches" of photography but the images I usually see are pure shit thus it has a stigma for me
>>2740399
I've done side gigs for events where it's about coverage thus its quantity over quality, I ended up with 100+ photos, after culling the shit and duplicates, with a push of a button I can resize all of them and have it saved.
One in many examples.
>>2740413
it's true.
but.
lightroom is cheaper, if people actually care
and its interface is supposedly better tailored for the purpose.
>>2740413
I tried for about 10 minutes to find a curves editing interface.
I failed.
Fuck that garbage.
>>2740388
This. They always seem to be the absolute worst.
>>2740388
I'm finding it hard to envision someone overhanding a lens.
Is this a joke?
>>2740450
>>2740453
Anything more than Photoshop 7.0 is for poser filter-crutch gearfags
>>2740465
I've seen too many. My friend did this when he asked to see my camera, he didn't understand why I yelled at him and grabbed it from his hands. There was a heavy 400mm lens on only supported by the bayonet.
>>2740403
>it's harder to pirate lightroom plugins like VSCO
literally torrent and drag & drop into a folder
>subscribed to angry photographer
>>2740480
>been a photographer for less than a year
>uses FF
>>2740479
Are the VSCO plugins actually the same, or have they just been replicated by eye?
>>2740484
That would be a fuckton of work to go through just to give it away for free.
>"natural light photographer"
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 500 Image Height 500 Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2740290
why do any of these things matter. What if someone takes perfectly fine pictures despite all this hubbub you posted?
>judges other photographers for the way they operate their workflow and the equipment they use
get the fuck off my /p/
>>2740502
>get off sugars' /p/
Gladly
>>2740506
>still butt furious that they got trolled 2 years ago
TYRANNOSAURUS REKT
>>2740301
>implying Canon doesn't have the next 3 versions in R&D right now with the IV just waiting till the mk III sales tilt slightly to something Nikon releases.
>>2740415
>shitty subject c&c
>Gearfags
>overwhelming PS manipulations
This
I don't care about couples, maternity etc it's not good photography but it's a honest job
Running stock firmware
>>2740505
Under rated post
I respect all photographers but people who turn HDR to 11 need to be bathed in acid to see how it feels
>>2740320
>shitting on clarity
fuck off m8
>>2740290
>Zeiss 3D Pop™
>Leica Glow™
>>2740388
u mad?
The only thing I can think of that annoys me is people who spend more time taking photos of themselves with their camera than finding something interesting to shoot.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-7R Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 8.3 (Macintosh) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.8 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 55 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2014:01:05 16:16:37 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/1.8 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 1600 Lens Aperture f/1.8 Brightness -1.1 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 55.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
>>2740763
>proving his point
Fuck off m8
>>2740644
Sorry I interrupted your shitty troll thread to have a discussion about popular image editing software
>>2740468
I use gimp, same thing I guess.
>>2740767
>I have 40+ cameras
>literally no zeiss or leica
>not even sone zeiss
>not even a broken nettar folder as an ornament
I don't even know that feel.
>filmfags taking pictures of baristas making coffee
>watermarking on film
Folks who think "photography is easy" because getting an image out of the camera is easy. This generalization ignores everything else that goes into an image - the light, the composition, the framing, the subject, the processing and hell, even the technical execution. Believe it or not, it's easier to fuck up your focus or get a blurry image, especially if you are under pressure and have a limited time window/are shooting in difficult conditions.
Not only that, but the rules, practices and standards of visual arts and creativity still apply. And what makes it rewarding is making a series of images, which can take weeks, months, possibly years.
Yes the barrier of entry to doing photography is not as difficult as painting or drawing, but both involve doing a lot of the same shit in the end, so who cares?
>>2740873
u mad?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Digital Photo Professional Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1200 Image Height 800
>>2741033
doesnt look like a barista or coffee being made so no
>>2740374
honestly most people I know who shoot shows don't use clarity
keep hating i don't mind
>>2740561
bro u didn't purchase a LF camera to troll us lel. just give it up you can't hack it in LF.
>>2740290
if said photographer:
- looks down on others for not exclusively shooting in manual
- looks down on others for not using film
- spams his social media accounts and immediately tells you to like/upvote/subscribe on his/her youtube
- gets upset when he sees younger people using full frame dslrs but they're not "pro" enough to know how to handle them
- trolls facebook and flickr then posts on /p/ criticizing the pictures because they get more attention than his own gallery
- in general bashes other photogs yet refuses to post any of his own work
>>2740781
this, but basement dwelling catfags and the ones who shoot test charts are the worst offenders.
>>2740290
>Shitposts in your thread
>has uneducated opinions
>>2740561
>isn't a gearfag
>carried his crop body around in that autistic as fuck metal case for forever
>>2740572
(and this, children, is why you shot canon. my rabal is simply such a well designed, engineered and tested device that there is almost nothing wrong with it. when you use it, you almost never shake your head and say "why?!". really the no flash trigger in live view mode is the only thing I don't understand.)
I am surprised no one mentioned shitty HDR photos.
>>2741284
Well I think it's because digifags now understand it's the only way they can take landscape or architecture photos.
I was going to list it in my greentext post, but once I thought about it for a second, I realised I hadn't actually seen that many terrible "Haybale and Rusted F-Truck" tone-mapping abortions recently, and that once the technique is understood and properly implemented, it's actually an essential part of producing quallity work with a digital capture medium.
>>2741286
the technique is fine and useful, but its one of the most commonly abused things , especially when you are just chillin around and accidentally wonder to some flickr group taken over by a horde of middle age gentleman (usually from a german-speaking country) and than BAM. hdr barn and snowy mountains, maybe a waterfall or two... accompanied with the saturation slider pumped to the top and a super-invasive cursive watermark.
See, I tend to JUDGE people BASED ON their CHARACTER and NOT on A DUMB FUCKING LIST OF ARBITRARY BULLSHIT.
>>2741290
i judge people on their use of caps lock
>>2740390
This.
Sometimes they don't care about the photo.
Just the 550D.
why is the 550D bad
>>2741222
>the ones who shoot test charts are the worst offenders.
People actually do this???
>>2741027
Honestly though, it is easy
>>2741525
Then why isn't everyone a world renowned photog with their images all over top magazines, shot for prestigious clients?
I am going to play devil's advocate here and say that the people who think it's easy compared to other art forms, severly over estimate how difficult it is to paint or draw or even play an instrument at an equal level of competence.
>>2741660
idk, to be profitable at photography i feel like it takes two years tops to be comfortable at anything IF you had the money to buy all the equipment you needed(strobes, modifiers, theory, etc). beyond that is networking and location.
traditional drawing and instruments, takes years or even a decade for people to be where they want to be at - and even then its hard to maintain an income unless you really develop a niche or something
ive seen some pros QA where they came from academia backgrounds and became sick of it, got a two year BA - and where set off
>>2740388
it's called the lobster claw
>>2740388
>caring about personal preference
>>2741837
>traditional drawing and instruments, takes years or even a decade for people to be where they want to be at
I'm 4 years into taking pictures and I'm still not exactly where I want to be. Granted I don't practice as consistently as I used to, and I've also made some strides. And I'm not the only one who feels this way. I've read from and spoken to pros who attest to it taking a good amount of time to master photography; Zack Arias for example said it took him something like 10 years to work out his true "vision". That's the elusive, vague concept a lot of photographers are after; crafting a perspective the world that's unique to them, with an approach that's fleshed out and consistent.
I think what really happens is not that photography is "easy", but that the bar is lower. People are falsely attributing a real sense of accomplishment to merely having captured something, and not to the thought put behind it and the overall execution. They think that photography is good so long as the subject is something they enjoy seeing. On one hand sometimes you just have to take the shot and live with the imperfections, but I digress...
When I look at professional or fine art photographers that I admire, there is always something about their images that stands out. There's a consistency and refinement, the images, they "pop" and they draw you in, and this is what people are going for when they try to master photography. No, they don't have to learn to draw a line or a face, shade and mix colors before creating the image and can just focus on making an interesting picture. But chasing that picture, whether it be chasing the light and the moment or spending hours setting it up in a studio or something, that's actually the challenging part. It can be really challenging, but people don't appreciate it because they think that simply being technically good makes an image good, whether it be a photograph, a drawing, or a painting.
>>2741920
>>2741920
>But chasing that picture
I definitely agree that finding your distinctive look and charm can take just as long as other art forms - even regcongized after death.
Actually my explanation was wrong and rushed, ultimately it's not easy to achieve the style you want. However I think it's actually easy to be a "professional" IF you can get over studio/equipment cost. With drawing it can be just pen and paper
and with instruments it can be at most a 1k investment. But for strobes, modifiers, backdrops, lenses, space, it can total at least 10k IF its budgets. Of course theres different ways of going this, but either way its still costly (plus team collaberation)
compared to other forms. But I firmly believe that if you have the money for a 4 light set up and a couple of diffusers, you can really accelerate your learning and opportunities compared to drawing or instrument playing.
But re-enforcing your point, yes it will take a long time to find what YOU want your pictures to be at. But for clients or marketing projects, its actually really short time with the proper equipment
