I love the first one... HDR... so sick of it... but this is from a guy who is about to cross proc a bunch of E7 with C41... I am going to end up with photos that look like something from some Iphone app... can we post these as 'rules' for the forum?
Hahaha! This is great! I'm very much over HDR, especially the really saturated Photomatix look. Every now and then I see one I like, but it would be about one in a thousand. This graph includes a summary of what I think of it: http://www.sahdad.com/?p=11
The megapixel thing annoys me too. It's nice to have more (when they're usable), but the number of pixels have little to do with final image quality! I don't care how many pixels you've got!
I do disagree with the watermark rant. I think those should be balanced. I barely know a single pro photog who doesn't use them (though most use subtle ones that don't detract from the viewer's experience). Usually I hear that particular rant from people who want to steal photos, rather than from people who just want to view them. Still funny though.
It's odd that they list HDR as number one since they use more HDR images than any other magazine I've ever read.
And as I was going through the articles from same year and month as this list was published, I found this -- http://www.wired.com/rawfile/2009/08/photographing-at-40mph -- An arms length self portrait shot vertically with a wide angle lens. Now if it were just HDR and had a watermark.
Man, there are so many people out there who like to rip on the way other people go about their work. It's a real downer. I in no way think I'm an amazing photographer, even a photographer at that, I'm amateur, but you have to start somewhere. So I'm sure I'm guilty of every one of those pet peeves listed.
I found the article interesting, but it seemed very hostile and grouchy to me.
@candidcaitlan "hostile and grouchy" yepp that is wired for you... they have every toy on earth and are still unhappy... but I love them... they are right at least under half the time... :)
@jinximages Do you use water marks on final images or only on proofs?
There is a photog names Rambo... does some work for mags... this link in NSFW (scantly clothed,and some nude, ladies) I love his mag style watermark... but it is one of the few I enjoy... but mainly I think it reminds me of a cover of Vogue or something...
@icywarm Only proofs and public galleries. That said, I don't always watermark - only really when there seems a likelihood of loss of income (clients copying and printing - because they will, as you likely know, no matter how poor the print quality) or as a bit of advertising (here, Flickr etc). Oh, also if someone wants "facebook" images - they will get a small watermark in a corner and sign a document stating they won't modify or crop the photos in any way (or print them).
Oh, also, if a client has already paid and the order seems complete (no likely reprints) I often won't bother to watermark online copies. I figure they can scan the prints anyway (and they do, whether they admit it or not, for the most part), so it doesn't matter if they can copy a low quality digital from my blog or such.
@icywarm I do like his watermark! I like how (for the most part) it is layered under his subject. Still eyecatching, but doesn't cover any features of the images. I'll be filing that away for possible future methods!
@icywarm I wish it was mine! Haha! When I saw it my first thought was, "How did they take that from my brain?!" The (rarely updated) blog is mine - somewhere to anonymously talk about nothing. But with my actual blog and site and everything else, I just don't have time for it. Maybe sometime in the future....
i have and never will be a fan of the watermark ... i do understand its use by professionals, but i think it can spoil some ok photos that would otherwise be quite good.
same goes for date stamps, grrrr @ them too, if you need to know the date its there electronically for goodness sake, but on your snapshots, its just silly ...
okies, stepping down from the soapbox hehe
(and sadly admitting i'm probably guilty of the oversharing, but i do try to restrict that for facebook hehe ... RIGHT, i really am done now ;))
I have never liked the competition thing about pixels either....Infact, I don't like it when I start obessing about other photographers camera.....I think photography is an art shared by everyone. and each picture has its own personality which came from the one behind the lense!
I'm just enjoying learning and meeting other people around the world who also enjoy taking pictures.
I'm guilty...of almost everything but HDR fever. Watched a fellow photographer go through it and that was enough for me. Now I can't stand it when it's overused
I'm at shooting pretty things like trees and flowers phase. LOL. Practice is the only solution. I do that happily and with many exclamation points.
Amuuuuuuuuusing.
I don't think I'm guilty of any of these.. I know a lotttt of people who are though ;D
Thankfully, my HDR obsessed friend has learnt how to use it responsibly.. :')
@candidcaitlan could'nt of put it better myself, likewise a recent article about 25 things a photographer should'nt do or over used techniques! what a load of old tosh. Photography is art and art should be accepted in any form.
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
I DON'T CARE! Some students in one of my classes today were having this talk...again...It's really annoying!
The megapixel thing annoys me too. It's nice to have more (when they're usable), but the number of pixels have little to do with final image quality! I don't care how many pixels you've got!
I do disagree with the watermark rant. I think those should be balanced. I barely know a single pro photog who doesn't use them (though most use subtle ones that don't detract from the viewer's experience). Usually I hear that particular rant from people who want to steal photos, rather than from people who just want to view them. Still funny though.
And as I was going through the articles from same year and month as this list was published, I found this -- http://www.wired.com/rawfile/2009/08/photographing-at-40mph -- An arms length self portrait shot vertically with a wide angle lens. Now if it were just HDR and had a watermark.
I found the article interesting, but it seemed very hostile and grouchy to me.
@jinximages Do you use water marks on final images or only on proofs?
There is a photog names Rambo... does some work for mags... this link in NSFW (scantly clothed,and some nude, ladies) I love his mag style watermark... but it is one of the few I enjoy... but mainly I think it reminds me of a cover of Vogue or something...
http://www.samrambo.com/
Oh, also, if a client has already paid and the order seems complete (no likely reprints) I often won't bother to watermark online copies. I figure they can scan the prints anyway (and they do, whether they admit it or not, for the most part), so it doesn't matter if they can copy a low quality digital from my blog or such.
same goes for date stamps, grrrr @ them too, if you need to know the date its there electronically for goodness sake, but on your snapshots, its just silly ...
okies, stepping down from the soapbox hehe
(and sadly admitting i'm probably guilty of the oversharing, but i do try to restrict that for facebook hehe ... RIGHT, i really am done now ;))
I'm just enjoying learning and meeting other people around the world who also enjoy taking pictures.
I'm guilty...of almost everything but HDR fever. Watched a fellow photographer go through it and that was enough for me. Now I can't stand it when it's overused
I'm at shooting pretty things like trees and flowers phase. LOL. Practice is the only solution. I do that happily and with many exclamation points.
I agree with you... seemed a bit hostile to me too.
I don't think I'm guilty of any of these.. I know a lotttt of people who are though ;D
Thankfully, my HDR obsessed friend has learnt how to use it responsibly.. :')