Controversial Topic: What irks you about other photographers?

Jin

Jin

Messages
192
Name
Jin
Edit My Images
Yes
1) If you are easily offended. Don't bother posting. We don't need a slagging match.
2) If you are going to rip on beginners. Don't bother posting. Everyone starts somewhere.
3) If you are going to pretend to be a zen master and talk about how you accept everyone with open arms and how you are the bigger person then this thread isn't for you.
4) Got a long list of things that irk you? Save it. Nobody likes to read an essay on a screen so break it up over several posts (obviously let someone else post first) it just helps readability.


So I have decided to create this thread after reading this one which was based on what people want from a camera club. What actually transpired was what people don't want from a camera club.

It got me thinking about other photographers I have met and the ones I know. As a group of people with a common interests photographers can be a really annoying group of people so I am asking everyone here what it is that annoys you about other photographers.
For me:

1) The Nikon vs Canon debate - I don't understand it, anyone that takes this view point seems to think the other is like taking a photo with a potato. Then it goes to the almighty debate over numbers at which point I feel myself slowly slipping into coma. I don't get it. Both are camera, both are capable of taking photos and both in the right hands will produce amazing results. Everyone has their reasons for choosing their camera just like everything else they have purchased but the Nikon vs Canon clowns seem to think it is acceptable to be disrespectful about another persons prized possession.

Both Canon and Nikon users are guilty of this crime.
 
I put myself in this bracket, so really im not just having a pop at other photographers, but I do find the majority of photographers I meet to be pretty introvert (some to greater degrees than others), and because of this I find it to be quite a struggle sometimes to engage in interesting conversations with them as the ONLY thing they are interested in is photography.
 
People who insist photographic "rules" must be broken, yet present a landscape with the horizon on the centre which would have looked much better on a third
People who say they never follow photographic "rules" yet present an image which perfectly illustrates thirds, leading lines etc
Photographers who insist their photos are better SOOC yet present images that could be massively improved with a light touch of processing
Photographers (usually poor ones) who when seeing a landscape assume you've photoshopped the hell out of it, whereas if they'd been out of bed at that time they'd have seen the vivid colours of a sunrise

Oh and I forgot, photographers who put enormous watermarks across crap which would get deleted in camera, as if someone would really nick it!
 
one of my pet hates is the ones that dismiss other peoples images but relish in showing there own
iv'e not come across many that do this but certainly one or two in the field so to speak

i'm not talking about people on photography forums i'm talking about fellow photographers i meet every now and again
most are sorted stand up guys but every now and again you meet one i'm sure others have met the type
 
From those I have met in person so far, at the club I joined last September, absolutely nothing. A nice bunch of people without arrogance, irrespective of their knowledge or equipment, who do not 'look down their noses' at those less experienced, and are willing to share their knowledge.

On forums?, well that can be a different story with some, but in the interest of harmony, I'll leave it there.

I do however endorse your comments on the Nikon v Canon debate Jin. That old record is so well worn, its become boring now.

Dave
 
Last edited:
Photographers who seem to think that megapixles = camera quality.

'Pro' photographers who are actually very poor photographers (I know, only a minority).

And on the other hand Photographers, usually Pro's but not always, who are so good they make me want to sell my gear and give up!

But what irks me most are photographers who do fantastic work but are very reluctant to share their knowledge, thankfully they are in the minority.
 
Photographers who look at glamour/nude shots of semi/fully-naked guys and go "I'm not gay... but..." before giving critique. As if you can't understand or admire a picture of someone unless you find them sexually attractive.
 
markmullen said:
Oh and I forgot, photographers who put enormous watermarks across crap which would get deleted in camera, as if someone would really nick it!
Click to expand...

I gather you enjoy your landscapes. I am not a landscape photographer but I do enjoy viewing them as it is one of the reasons why I bought a camera. Yours are very good :).

As for watermarks you that was my number 2.

2) Watermarks/Copyrights - I don't mean those that insist that every photo they take needs to be watermarked but I find the whole idea of it futile. If you watermark your image and somebody wants to use it they will use it. They will even go to the efforts of cropping out your watermark. If you want to stop them from using your image then watermark all over it of course no one will want to use your image but it will also look like crap so the question is why bother watermarking. I don't have anything against anyone that wants to sign their work like an artist would do but its those that post an image on the internet and expect people not to copy it.

If you are posting an image on the internet and you are concerned about how it may be used. Post a low-res version because at least that way you won't lose sales.

Steve Smith said:
Photographers who see me with a film camera and ask "can you still get film for that?". As if I use it just because I like the sound of the shutter!
Click to expand...
You made me choke on my tea! :D

Daryl said:
Irks? Egos, togs to realize they don't have an original idea. Everyone copies someone else and then adds their own twist to it. And photographers who don't share info....
Click to expand...

I don't mind copiers. I do it all the the time to replicate shots just so I can learn something new but it's those that pass it off as their own work.
 
I am too laid back to be bothered by anything........................:LOL:
 
Photographers who are just plain rude and selfish when on location.

Photographers who clearly have more passion for the 'equipment' than the 'subject' or the 'photography'.

Photographers who have the best of everything but somehow still fail to get decent images.

Photographers who consider high end gear from a few years ago no longer good enough for their needs yet their needs remain the same.


Nothing 'wrong' as such with the last three points but they 'irk' me all the same.
 
Last edited:
Steve Smith said:
Photographers who see me with a film camera and ask "can you still get film for that?". As if I use it just because I like the sound of the shutter!
Click to expand...

Although I could be using it as a wallet. I saw this yesterday. Someone bought an old Kodak box camera and took it to a film camera specialist because he didn't know how to open it. When it was opened, they found £6,500 in cash inside!

1560778_713005162065876_1583042561_n.jpg


So there's another one. Photographers who find money inside cameras when I don't!


Steve.
 
I haven't time to list all mine :D

But...

Yep - as said above, those that won't share ideas/techniques but are always asking it of others (I can name names, but won't lol)

Gear snobs - so you have more money, less sense, or both, and yes you're still sh-it (Yep, I can name names again)

Those too lazy/arrogant to learn & improve - you should be able to look back just a couple of years and say 'Yes I've got better' (OMG can I name names on this one :D )

And generally anyone with their head up their own self-important self-loving arse (you can guess that I can name names here!!!)

Oh - and Pros who think it means they are better than non-Pros (some of the best togs I know are just keen amateurs)

I'll save the other 150+ irks for another time :D

Dave
 
3) Macro lenses are solely for bugs and flowers - Holy crap! I have seen everyone do it from the "pro" to the newbies and the macro setting on their camera. As soon as a macro lens goes on a body off to go find the nearest bug or flower. How has an entire lens category come down to such a small number of subjects?


Gaz J said:
Photographers who think I know what I'm doing.
Click to expand...

Wow. That, that is actually really quite profound and totally describes the way I shoot (some idea with a giant dollop of trial and error).
 
Last edited:
On forums:

1. Militant obscurantists - those who take pride in their ignorance and seek to "elevate" others to their level.
2. Those who say "all art is subjective" and do all they can to close down any discussion on the subject.
 
StephenM said:
1. Militant obscurantists - those who take pride in their ignorance and seek to "elevate" others to their level.
Click to expand...

You could have saved characters and typed "People who love mirrorless cameras"
 
  • Like
Reactions: PMN
markmullen said:
People who insist photographic "rules" must be broken, yet present a landscape with the horizon on the centre which would have looked much better on a third
People who say they never follow photographic "rules" yet present an image which perfectly illustrates thirds, leading lines etc
Photographers who insist their photos are better SOOC yet present images that could be massively improved with a light touch of processing
Photographers (usually poor ones) who when seeing a landscape assume you've photoshopped the hell out of it, whereas if they'd been out of bed at that time they'd have seen the vivid colours of a sunrise

Oh and I forgot, photographers who put enormous watermarks across crap which would get deleted in camera, as if someone would really nick it!
Click to expand...

:agree:

..and people who insist that there is a 'correct' way of doing photography, particularly those who think 'street' is some sort of machismo challenge and must be done using flash, a 20mm lens, and shot into the faces of strangers at a distance of five feet.
 
1. Selective Colour
2. Pros who think they're better then everyone else.
3. Amateur photographers who are very snobby towards pros and say stupid things like 'better then most so called "pros" I've seen'

oh and people who don't get the inverse watermark rule. The bigger the watermark the worse the photo
 
Last edited:
4) I am now a pro (because my f&f say my photos are great) - These are the worst ones, they go by names like "shutterbug photography", "dreamscape photography". Their portraits look awful and their subjects are posed in really horrible ways. They are know to over edit their photos and selective colouring is somewhere in between being selective and being half assed. They believe they are professional because ignorant cheapskates are willing to throw money at them and manual mode is known as "Super hard mode".
 
Last edited:
boyfalldown said:
1. Selective Colour
2. Pros who think they're better then everyone else.
3. Amateur photographers who are very snobby towards pros and say stupid things like 'better then most so called "pros" I've seen'

oh and people who don't get the inverse watermark rule. The bigger the watermark the worse the photo
Click to expand...


NEVER read a thread from the bottom up, the rest is now being viewed through a screen full of coffee :ROFLMAO:
 
'Passionate' photographers who take 'stunning' photographs.
 
Fanboyz. TBH, the Nikon/Canon "argument" is generally in jest because everyone knows that Micro Four Thirds is the way forward...
 
5) Subject enthusiasts that think they are photographers - So these are people who are passionate about a certain subject and because they take photos of these subjects they believe they are photographers.

This is common amongst motorsports, train and plane spotters, bird watchers and bug enthusiasts.

They get so excited about seeing the subject of their interest that all concern for technique and creativity goes out the window. Every photo is the same photo with minor differences. EG Bird on branch, another bird on branch, car driving with other cars driving, train at platform, another train at platform. Their photos are generally boring and only other subject enthusiasts would find it interesting.
 
What annoys me is people who post on here with a black font when one of the themes you can choose is black!!
 
Jin said:
5) Subject enthusiasts that think they are photographers - So these are people who are passionate about a certain subject and because they take photos of these subjects they believe they are photographers.

This is common amongst motorsports, train and plane spotters, bird watchers and bug enthusiasts.

They get so excited about seeing the subject of their interest that all concern for technique and creativity goes out the window. Every photo is the same photo with minor differences. EG Bird on branch, another bird on branch, car driving with other cars driving, train at platform, another train at platform. Their photos are generally boring and only other subject enthusiasts would find it interesting.
Click to expand...

Exactly! Why do they never shoot a car on a branch, or a bug at a platform?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top