You Are Not A Photographer

[HeezDeadJim]

In your opinion, no offense.

Holding something up to ridcule is immature at best. That site is nothing but a gradeschool playground with idiots making fun of others for entertainment.

I've seen "art" sell for thousands that I would have used for a drop cloth, so who am I to judge it for anyone but myself, and if that's what I'm doing, the appropriate thing is to keep it to myself.

There's a difference between adding to the comment section of a "website to ridicule" than viewing one.

Same with it's completely different to see someone that dresses strange and you think it's weird........than to pull out your cell phone and take a photo of the person just so you can ridicule them with your friends online.

 

[HeezDeadJim]

A lot of persons use equipment as a tool and do not get into the technical. If something just does the job, so be it.

Many professionals treat a camera in the same way. They buy something that gets the job done for what they shoot and could care less about the technical aspects of the camera itself provided they can set the shutter speed, aperature and maybe have a DoF scale on the lens.

You mention barrel distortion.

I wasn't trying to portray myself as better than the ones that don't understand the science behind photography. What I meant to convey is that we have very different views on why we use the camera. I only pointed out "barrel distortion" not because it's important...but because it's something usually advanced photographers understand or even know about. Some of us go out of our way to understand these technical factors for kicks rather than "real world" application.

Using an expensive camera just as a tool wouldn't be too dissimilar from a person buying a Dodge Viper for a newspaper delivery route "because it's super fast"...and the aspiring mechanic drooling over even getting to drive one and understands everything under the hood (I realize this is an extreme example)...

 

[pioneervato]

The whole premise of the sight was to bring up the fact that not everyone who can pick up a DSLR and press the shutter is a "photographer" . It would be like me buying a set of mechanic's tools and calling myself a master mechanic when I know damn well that I'm not. Just because I may be able to do a tune up or replace an alternator still does not qualify me as a master mechanic.

I have been in photography for almost 40 years and I cut my teeth on film cameras in nearly every format and have spent most of my life studying photography in one form or another . And in my years I have met those who charge good money for photography I would be embarrassed to put my name to. There are those who think that just because you get paid for it makes you a "professional" but there is a huge difference (IMO) in defining "professional caliber" work with work that does not quite measure up and still classify one's work as being professional because they got paid for it.

Many of the photos I looked at on that site are very similar to the type I have seen by photographers who lack the experience and basic knowledge of what
professional work is all about. Yes, I know, everybody has to start somewhere but I have issues with those who make claims to being a "professional" when, clearly, they are not.

I agree completely with those who said that there are (amateurs) who can run circles around (professionals) and should tell you exactly what I am referring to. In photography there is no license or certification required that states you are a professional as there is in other professions such as medicine, accounting, teaching, law enforcement, etc. If I can't back up my title as such with professional quality work that I feel can compete with others then I really have no business making such claims whether I get paid for it or not.

Professional photography should be exactly that. Nothing more and nothing less.

 

[chillwolf]

The whole premise of the sight was to bring up the fact that not everyone who can pick up a DSLR and press the shutter is a "photographer" . It would be like me buying a set of mechanic's tools and calling myself a master mechanic when I know damn well that I'm not. Just because I may be able to do a tune up or replace an alternator still does not qualify me as a master mechanic.

I have been in photography for almost 40 years and I cut my teeth on film cameras in nearly every format and have spent most of my life studying photography in one form or another . And in my years I have met those who charge good money for photography I would be embarrassed to put my name to. There are those who think that just because you get paid for it makes you a "professional" but there is a huge difference (IMO) in defining "professional caliber" work with work that does not quite measure up and still classify one's work as being professional because they got paid for it.

Many of the photos I looked at on that site are very similar to the type I have seen by photographers who lack the experience and basic knowledge of what
professional work is all about. Yes, I know, everybody has to start somewhere but I have issues with those who make claims to being a "professional" when, clearly, they are not.

I agree completely with those who said that there are (amateurs) who can run circles around (professionals) and should tell you exactly what I am referring to. In photography there is no license or certification required that states you are a professional as there is in other professions such as medicine, accounting, teaching, law enforcement, etc. If I can't back up my title as such with professional quality work that I feel can compete with others then I really have no business making such claims whether I get paid for it or not.

Professional photography should be exactly that. Nothing more and nothing less.

Very well said, Jesse! My feelings exactly.

 

[kretinus]

And yet the person who actually decides if a work is "professional" is the person who decides to write the check or keep looking.

After that any argument is entirely subjective.

 

[rollei35guy]

A website devoted to mocking other peoples work is nothing but vanity and arrogance in practice. beauty is in the eye of the beholder and the same pros who mock others work, react like little whiny girls if their worked is criticised in the least.

...

I agree. Entertainment at the expense of others. Much like the site that ridicules people who shop at certain retail stores. I don't see the point.

Perhaps the creators would submit their work for approval and critique?

 

[HeezDeadJim]

And yet the person who actually decides if a work is "professional" is the person who decides to write the check or keep looking.

After that any argument is entirely subjective.

Exactly true with people who buy audio from Wart-mal or Best Die. They pay for cheaply made (to us anyways) speakers/receivers. After that, how they sound is entirely subjective...

 

[rollei35guy]

Exactly true with people who buy audio from Wart-mal or Best Die. They pay for cheaply made (to us anyways) speakers/receivers. After that, how they sound is entirely subjective...

Don't forget that 'the sound' might not be the objective. The application might dictate that something other than 'state of the art' is desirable.

 

[HeezDeadJim]

Don't forget that 'the sound' might not be the objective. The application might dictate that something other than 'state of the art' is desirable.

Fair enough. Probably the same way pocket cameras sell far more than DSLRs or advanced cameras. It's not only the price most take into account. Image quality is a big factor....but some base it on how easy a camera is to use (push dah buh-tton).

Bose and HTiB are big sellers because it's a nice easy package to set up and forget (none of this pre-amp, amp, monoblocks, bi-amping speakers nonsense).