Controversial Topic: What irks you about other photographers?

Phil Young said:
Next time you see one of these people, tell them in the animal world they fight for territory, then put your dukes up and see what happens :LOL:
Click to expand...

but only if he's smaller than you and you think you can take him.
 
martinfuge said:
Another for me is ignorant photographers when you see another photographer on location and say hello and they ignore you and look at you to say this is my shot location.
Click to expand...

I got told to clear off at my local race track by the official track photographer. :(
 
The ultimate irony is sometimes you just want to go out for a quite evening taking some photos just to clear your mind, while more often or not I'm more than happy to chat, in fact on most TP meets I'll be lucky if I take more than a dozen photos :eek: but sometimes I just want to be left alone...it reminds me of my Uncle Alan, he was quite big in the fishing world as a result of this I actually found it hard to go fishing and actually being able to fish without people asking him questions or just simply wanting to say hello, this effect meant that he partially never fished in public nearly always fishing on private sections of river and even going to the lengths of building his own lake on his land to fish on...
 
martinfuge said:
For me its other photographers who don't look out for others taking photos esp at events and stand in your way on purpose so they can get there shot.
Click to expand...

+1 I was photographing at Beltane Fire Festival this year (just as a normal paying punter) and at one of the performance areas the scramble by some photographers made me embarrassed to be a photographer. Shoving each other (and other people) out of the way, elbows everywhere, ignoring the stewards polite requests to please step back a bit.

One photographer even reached over the rope barrier, tapped one of the official event photographers on the shoulder and told him to get out of the way - wtf!? As far as I am concerned if you are at an event as a paying punter (ie: not paid by the organisers to take photos) then a big camera and lens gives you no special privileges - if someone else with a camera phone or no camera at all got to the front before you then tough - don't be a dick and push your way in. Same goes for the zoo or other places when hogging restricted viewing areas.
 
That those who spew out hackneyed old tripe get paid and I don't....:p

Film photographers who somehow get magical results from films I find only ever look horrendous.
 
1) 'Uncle bobs' & 'auntie bobbetts' - you're at a wedding as guests to enjoy the couples day. They've clearly hired a professional photographer to get some great images, so why must you step in front of said pros all the time and ruin shots or shadow them and add your opinion in at every opportunity. At a recent wedding it got so bad it was the first time I had to politely point this out to them and ask them to be a bit more considerate.

2) gear heads. "I take shots of little jimmy playing football and a bit of macro around the house but I don't think my D800/5Dmkii etc. is good enough, please recommend a good camera" - stop cherry picking the bad advice - you know - the ones that confirm your need for gear acquisition - and start listening to the proper advice or just don't ask at all.
 
OP you seem really angry.

My pet hate is people who post nothing but pictures of busses or trains on Flickr. FFS. Does the world really need to see that picture of a number 56 bus?

PS. Hope the way I'm holding the camera in my avatar doesn't make anyone real mad.
 
Gear snobs and photographers with more money than knowledge. Buying the big flash camera and the latest super lens when you have no idea just means you will now be taking crystal clear and sharp crap shots.

Official photographers who behave like t***s! I was an official photographer for 3 years for truck racing at a certain circuit. The year after I gave it up the new official guy didn't like it that I had set up both my camera and video camera on tripods at a prime spot. He tried to squeeze himself in between me and the barrier! When I told him to stop being an arse he spouted off that HE was the official photographer blah blah blah. He went off in a huff when I told him he only got the job because I gave it up :D
 
I have no issue with other photographers, unless their results are stunning or they think mine are then we have nothing to add to each others output. So long as they don't step in my way when I'm about to shoot, they can do and say what they want.

I wil try to help out the pixel-inquisitionist ("How many pixels has your stuff, mate?" Or, "My phone's got better pixels than your brick.") but not for long.

I take photos for my own satisfaction, if others like them I am pleased, if they don't like them (and say why) I am also pleased.

I make music using my piano, my saxophone and my blues harp -- I even sing occaasionally -- but I don't expect everyone to like what I do. Indeed I'd be rather suspicious if everyone did. Same with my pictures. I try to please all of the people all of the time but that's not going to happen and I appreciate it if other photographers adopt the same attitude.
 
Quote BBR "Photographers who seem to think that megapixles = camera quality."

:agree:
 
People who boast* about their images being "straight out of camera" while seemingly unaware that all this means is that they've handed over processing decisions to whoever designed the default conversion presets for their camera's software.

It'd be like a film photographer boasting that their photographs were "straight out of camera" because they'd taken the film to Boots for the processing rather than processed it themselves in a darkroom.

*just to clarify, sometimes it's useful to know that an image has had minimal processing; but I'm talking about people who look down their noses at any use of lightroom/photoshop/equivalent
 
People who never, ever, EVER put a UV/protection filter on their lenses and tell everyone else the MUST do likewise or their pictures will be unbearable to look at.
 
ghoti said:
It'd be like a film photographer boasting that their photographs were "straight out of camera" because they'd taken the film to Boots for the processing rather than processed it themselves in a darkroom.
Click to expand...

When you use transparency film, the resulting slide is straight out of camera as the film processing is a constant and should be the same regardless of who does it.


Steve.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PMN
Steve Smith said:
When you use transparency film, the resulting slide is straight out of camera as the film processing is a constant and should be the same regardless of who does it.


Steve.
Click to expand...
Well, sort of. But the film chemists who designed the film have still had some creative input into how your final image will look. That may be splitting hairs a bit; because, short of designing your own film, you're fundamentally limited in how much control you can take.

My point is that people are kidding themselves if they think their SOOC images are somehow purer art when they've neglected the opportunity to take back some of the creative control that they passively handed to others in the process of digital conversion. People may be happy with the images they get SOOC and that's fine, and deciding to just go with them may be a creative decision in its own right. However, completely disregarding digital processing as cheating is silly and betrays an ignorance of how your camera actually works.
 
Last edited:
Yes, but it's not making choices in post processing, it's taking the shot knowing what the processing will do and working with it.

The same as setting up all of your preferences in camera and accepting the JPG it produces. As long as you do the setting up to suit you, the images will be the same (or similar) to those taken in RAW and worked on later.

Obviously you have more control with the RAW approach but not everyone wants to do that.


Steve.
 
Steve Smith said:
Yes, but it's not making choices in post processing, it's taking the shot knowing what the processing will do and working with it.

The same as setting up all of your preferences in camera and accepting the JPG it produces. As long as you do the setting up to suit you, the images will be the same (or similar) to those taken in RAW and worked on later.

Obviously you have more control with the RAW approach but not everyone wants to do that.


Steve.
Click to expand...
I agree. I was moaning about people who snort at the idea of any sort of digital PP.

I have three customised conversion presets in my camera. If I'm on holiday or a family day out just taking snaps for sharing with friends & family later, I'll often just shoot straight to JPG and use these. If I'm out taking pictures as a hobby photographer I'll usually shoot RAW and spend some time on them in post.
 
Steve Smith said:
When you use transparency film, the resulting slide is straight out of camera as the film processing is a constant and should be the same regardless of who does it.


Steve.
Click to expand...

Provided that they use "standard processing" etc. You can push or pull slide fim (and if that has any effect at all, it must by definition "look different") and you can also change the colour balance by slightly changing the chemical formulation. Hence the use of clip tests to determine exactly how a film should be processed.

Sorry for the off topic post.

Edit to add - since I've gone off topic, I'll add thast I use a Billingham photo jacket and hence am a source of "irk". If TK Maxx (or whoever) sell an equivalent that I can use to carry around 6 5x4 DDSs plus meters etc. that I need to have easily to hand, I'd get one. But other jackets seem to have pockets that are too small.
 
Last edited:
Gaz J said:
Photographers who buy grey imports and then bang on about people taking the moral high ground on the VAT etc that they are fleecing from the government to justify their tax evasion :)
Click to expand...

Lol. Nice one! Made me grin.
 
Last edited:
Hence forth known as Grey Gary.

Not a lot irks me.
 
I get soo annoyed by wildlife photographers chasing after birds,especially migrants that have obviously had a stressful enough flight to get to our little island,and having total disregard for their welfare instead of just standing still and waiting for the bird to appear and go about its normal every day business of feeding and trying to stay alive. I witnessed this at Spurn Point this year where a rare warbler was spotted,and instead of standing patiently for for it to come into view a chap who was there on a bus trip with a birding club in the midlands was rushing about through the under-growth flushing birds all over the place. Myself and another photographer just stood in disbelief on how he behaved.:mad:
 
People who say you MUST...
 
I've had two occurrences recently that really annoyed me. First being someone who insisted that Sony was the only make of camera that any 'proper' photographer should be using, (needless to say I just walked away), and the other was someone who told me I needn't waste money on Queensbury albums for my clients when Tesco could print just as good quality! That one I had a long and painful argument on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top