Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 09 Mar 2015 (Monday) 19:27
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Thoughts on this FB page

 
Colin ­ Glover
Goldmember
1,376 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 131
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Southport nr Liverpool United Kingdom
     
Mar 12, 2015 16:01 |  #16

As I've studied law specialising in tort and contract, I'll add my tuppence. The defence of CC will only stand up if CC is actually being given. It's obvious that it's NOT being given on this site or on the FB page. Yes some of the images on the website are honestly appalling and goodness knows what the Photog was thinking posting the image on the Web. However, the tone of the site is an "OMG!" tone. I have aspergers syndrome and I have been bullied in the workplace because of it. Not because of an inability to recognise it though. I noticed that working on a one to one basis with someone they were fine with me. Get a group of people working with me and the bullying started. It was just "A little bit of harmless fun and nothing was meant by it." was the usual response. The age range of the perpetrators was under 40 and they usually took illegal substances. This site thrives because of a group of like minded people who feed off each other. if this site was 'Outed' on TV or in the press they might be persuaded to stop their awful business practices. Are the sites owners professional photographers trying to get rid of competition? I don't think so. Do they post any of their own similar shots to show the correct way to do it? Definitely not. It's obviously just a big laugh to someone. I was asked by a bride to take a photo of her holding her bouquet out in front in focus and the bride OOF. She showed me a picture and I copied it. Does that make me a thief? In their eyes it "Probably" does. I also did a layer mask on the bouquet, turning the rest of the image mono. The bride loved it. But of course it would fall foul of this website. This site should be shut down and shown up for the "Chav" attitude it so proudly boasts.


Canon EOS 70D, Canon EOS 600D, EF-S 18-55 ii, EF 55-200 USM ii, EF-S 75-300 iii, Tamron 28-80, Sigma 70-210. Pentax 50mm, Pentax 135mm, EF-S 55-250, Raynox Macro adapter, Neewer filters (CPL, UV, FLD & ND4), Fuji HS20 EXR (30X zoom ) & cable release, Yongnuo 560 iii & Luxon 9800A manual flashguns for the Fuji, Hama Star 63 tripod, Hongdek RC-6 remote control, Velbon DF 40 www.point-n-shoot.co.uk website.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
btrinkle
Member
Avatar
31 posts
Likes: 22
Joined Feb 2015
     
Mar 12, 2015 21:42 |  #17

I've seen a lot of bad photography (some of them my own), but I would always think all would be better served if the photographer was given some help and showed some kindness. I am always amazed how cruel we can be to one another.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davidfarina
Goldmember
Avatar
3,357 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 1034
Joined May 2013
     
Mar 13, 2015 05:23 |  #18

I just wrote them an email:

I just came across your site and I am simply disgusted by the whole idea of that discriminating site. Who are you to pull people into bad light? I know it myself, everyone is a DJ, a model or a photographer and everyone's a "pro", but do this people bug you so hard that you start criticizing them?

I can only guess how much "pro" you guys are... Interestingly I don't seem to find any work of you guys.

It's really sad that you criticize AND expose those photographers to the world which is simply weak. To me that tells me that you must be really frustrated with your own limited skills, because if you would be happy and successful with your own photography, you wouldn't care what other photographers do.

Better go out and learn to master photography yourself instead of doing weak **** like that.


Sony A7RII | Sony A7S
EF 40 | EF 70-300L | FD 35 Tilt-Shift
FE 16-35 | FE 28 | FE 90
CV 15 4.5 III | CV 40 1.4 MC | Summilux 50 ASPH
Website (external link) | 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Colin ­ Glover
Goldmember
1,376 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 131
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Southport nr Liverpool United Kingdom
     
Mar 13, 2015 06:36 |  #19

Great!


Canon EOS 70D, Canon EOS 600D, EF-S 18-55 ii, EF 55-200 USM ii, EF-S 75-300 iii, Tamron 28-80, Sigma 70-210. Pentax 50mm, Pentax 135mm, EF-S 55-250, Raynox Macro adapter, Neewer filters (CPL, UV, FLD & ND4), Fuji HS20 EXR (30X zoom ) & cable release, Yongnuo 560 iii & Luxon 9800A manual flashguns for the Fuji, Hama Star 63 tripod, Hongdek RC-6 remote control, Velbon DF 40 www.point-n-shoot.co.uk website.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MattPharmD
Senior Member
Avatar
255 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2011
     
Mar 13, 2015 15:12 as a reply to  @ Colin Glover's post |  #20

I would question if the discussion of Fair Use even applies here. Since he is sharing a facebook post, I don't think anyone has ever considered it a copyright violation. It is probably covered by the FB TOS, wouldn't you think?


Photography is just a hobby for me.
Twitter: @PharmNerdMatt (external link)
Youtube:The PharmNerd (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nogo
POTN record for # of posts during "Permanent Ban"
8,526 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 632
Joined Dec 2013
Location: All Along the Natchez Trace (Clinton, MS)
Post edited over 6 years ago by Nogo. (2 edits in all)
     
Mar 13, 2015 15:30 |  #21

MattPharmD wrote in post #17473583 (external link)
I would question if the discussion of Fair Use even applies here. Since he is sharing a facebook post, I don't think anyone has ever considered it a copyright violation. It is probably covered by the FB TOS, wouldn't you think?

You can legally share any (legal) post made on Facebook with anyone. Only thing that limits that is the users privacy settings.

The legal questions pertain to the website that is separate from the Facebook Page that is listed in a later comment.


Philip

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
freestylee30
Senior Member
Avatar
796 posts
Gallery: 164 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 171
Joined Jun 2007
Location: 98059
     
Mar 13, 2015 15:59 |  #22

Looks like the FB page was taken down? Good! ( imo ;-)a )


Brandon | zenfolio (external link)| ♥ feedback ♥
Eternal Blue Forever Green
Image Editing OK

CANON 5DIV 50 f/1.8 85 f/1.8 135 f/2L 70-200 f/2.8L IS II
ROKINON 14 f/2.8 | TAMRON 15-30 f/2.8 VC 24-70 f/2.8 VC | SIGMA 35 f/1.4 Art |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Colin ­ Glover
Goldmember
1,376 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 131
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Southport nr Liverpool United Kingdom
     
Mar 14, 2015 09:23 |  #23

The FB page is still up, as is a nee closed group, you are not a photographer you just have an overpriced camera. The latter won't let you see the posts unless you are accepted. The last thing they posted on the normal FB page was 50 worst photos taken by pro's, linking to another site but I'd just the same person as evidenced by the airbrushing. Boy they hate dropping a person in another shot. Some shots are so OOF I can't believe a pro would show them to anyone, let alone post it online. Others show photographers doing what clients want. Nothing wrong with that. But I think that they have bolstered the article with a few faked ones to justify that. Would a Google image search show the originals? Even if they were from Facebook. And would deliberately blurring a shot to rubbish someone be legal? It stinks of a person who is mad they can't afford a proper camera. I was like that till I could afford a DSLR but I never did anything to diss pro's,


Canon EOS 70D, Canon EOS 600D, EF-S 18-55 ii, EF 55-200 USM ii, EF-S 75-300 iii, Tamron 28-80, Sigma 70-210. Pentax 50mm, Pentax 135mm, EF-S 55-250, Raynox Macro adapter, Neewer filters (CPL, UV, FLD & ND4), Fuji HS20 EXR (30X zoom ) & cable release, Yongnuo 560 iii & Luxon 9800A manual flashguns for the Fuji, Hama Star 63 tripod, Hongdek RC-6 remote control, Velbon DF 40 www.point-n-shoot.co.uk website.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CameraMan
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
13,337 posts
Gallery: 26 photos
Likes: 745
Joined Dec 2010
Location: In The Sticks
     
Mar 14, 2015 09:48 |  #24

MattPharmD wrote in post #17472024 (external link)
For the FB page in general, it is legal, within his rights of free speech, and totally without class. The "author" is a tool.

The photo... I love it.
I am well aware of what the flag code says. Screw it. This photo, and others like it that have popped up are wonderful expressions behind the real reason people serve. Not for the piece of cloth, but for the ideas the flag represents, and the people the child represents. This is my favorite baby photo ever.

I couldn't agree more. I've sent both the photographer and the mother messages on Facebook last night saying that they should be proud of that photo. Surprisingly enough, the happy couple with the baby live a couple hours away from me in Georgia, yet another missed opportunity by me for some free publicity. :)

As for the youarenotaphotographer site, it's mostly just snapshots from non professionals that people have swiped off Facebook. Some are professional but it gives a great insight into the competition out there for business. I am happy to say that I have never seen any of my photos on that site so I guess I'm an OK photographer. :)


Photographer (external link) | The Toys! | Facebook (external link) | Video (external link) | Flickr (external link)
Shampoo sounds like an unfortunate name for a hair product.
You're a ghost driving a meat-coated skeleton made from stardust, riding a rock, hurtling through space. Fear Nothing!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Preeb
Goldmember
Avatar
2,646 posts
Gallery: 134 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 998
Joined Sep 2011
Location: Logan County, CO
     
Mar 14, 2015 10:42 |  #25

MattPharmD wrote in post #17472024 (external link)
For the FB page in general, it is legal, within his rights of free speech, and totally without class. The "author" is a tool.

The photo... I love it.
I am well aware of what the flag code says. Screw it. This photo, and others like it that have popped up are wonderful expressions behind the real reason people serve. Not for the piece of cloth, but for the ideas the flag represents, and the people the child represents. This is my favorite baby photo ever.

I agree, an outstanding image, thought provoking. Nothing disrespectful about it - quite the opposite, in fact. Ought to be in the running for a Pulitzer, instead of being slammed all over Facebook.


Rick
6D Mark II - EF 17-40 f4 L -- EF 100mm f2.8 L IS Macro -- EF 70-200 f4 L IS w/1.4 II TC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
freestylee30
Senior Member
Avatar
796 posts
Gallery: 164 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 171
Joined Jun 2007
Location: 98059
     
Mar 14, 2015 10:43 |  #26

Colin Glover wrote in post #17474541 (external link)
The FB page is still up, as is a nee closed group, you are not a photographer you just have an overpriced camera. The latter won't let you see the posts unless you are accepted. The last thing they posted on the normal FB page was 50 worst photos taken by pro's, linking to another site but I'd just the same person as evidenced by the airbrushing. Boy they hate dropping a person in another shot. Some shots are so OOF I can't believe a pro would show them to anyone, let alone post it online. Others show photographers doing what clients want. Nothing wrong with that. But I think that they have bolstered the article with a few faked ones to justify that. Would a Google image search show the originals? Even if they were from Facebook. And would deliberately blurring a shot to rubbish someone be legal? It stinks of a person who is mad they can't afford a proper camera. I was like that till I could afford a DSLR but I never did anything to diss pro's,

The original link on the first post isn't working - "Page not found or has been removed". I didn't actually go looking for it.


Brandon | zenfolio (external link)| ♥ feedback ♥
Eternal Blue Forever Green
Image Editing OK

CANON 5DIV 50 f/1.8 85 f/1.8 135 f/2L 70-200 f/2.8L IS II
ROKINON 14 f/2.8 | TAMRON 15-30 f/2.8 VC 24-70 f/2.8 VC | SIGMA 35 f/1.4 Art |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

4,458 views & 3 likes for this thread
Thoughts on this FB page
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is ArcticRose
815 guests, 297 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.