What are your photography pet-peeves?

Yeah flickr is basically the worst.

One thing is for sure, flickr is not a way to tell if a shot is good or not! No matter how many views

Another one for me is gear snobbery, which comes in two forms. First is those who insist everyone will eventually want to "upgrade" to full-frame for the much higher image quality that is actually only noticeable on very large prints - my 40D is perfectly good for my requirements thanks. If you think back to film days, no one ever suggested that every photographer would eventually go to large format - 35mm was fine for me.

The second form is "such-and-such lens is garbage; don't touch it" and then recommending something way beyond the OP's budget - you have to respect the fact that we all have different budgets available to indulge in our hobby, and the best available for the budget is all the OP requires.

This is fun. Having a little rant now and then is good for you, in my opinion. Just try to avoid letting it make you bitter.

Madweasel wrote in post #8631506
Another one for me is gear snobbery, which comes in two forms. First is those who insist everyone will eventually want to "upgrade" to full-frame for the much higher image quality that is actually only noticeable on very large prints - my 40D is perfectly good for my requirements thanks. If you think back to film days, no one ever suggested that every photographer would eventually go to large format - 35mm was fine for me.

The second form is "such-and-such lens is garbage; don't touch it" and then recommending something way beyond the OP's budget - you have to respect the fact that we all have different budgets available to indulge in our hobby, and the best available for the budget is all the OP requires.

This is fun. Having a little rant now and then is good for you, in my opinion. Just try to avoid letting it make you bitter.

Thanks. All of us have probably been guilty of this at one time. We need to be reminded that everyone has their own limit as to how much to spend.

People that think editing/photoshopping pictures is unnatural.

Lazuka wrote in post #8631977
People that think editing/photoshopping pictures is unnatural.

http://img98.imageshac​k.us …62/dollbysmthfr​eshui1.jpg

That's unnatural

You never talked to agency art directors, did you?

Oh, and there is lessened image quality when the same number of pixels is crammed into a smaller sensor, but this isn't the thread for that.

Photographers who swear blind that they do 'no image manipulation whatsoever' then clearly present something that is layer-masked to hell an back (nothing wrong with that, but it's best to admit it, rather than claim mysical powers when it comes to capturing one of those classic dreamscape scenes)!

I think i may be alone with this one but what urks me more than anything is when people post a photo into a forum & then say the word " enjoy " I dont know what the hell it is but that to me is the most smug, self licking comment i can imagine. Waiters do it a lot now when they place your food on the table also. Like i said im well aware im along on this but for some reason it drives me crazy.

Madweasel wrote in post #8631506
Another one for me is gear snobbery, which comes in two forms. First is those who insist everyone will eventually want to "upgrade" to full-frame for the much higher image quality that is actually only noticeable on very large prints - my 40D is perfectly good for my requirements thanks. If you think back to film days, no one ever suggested that every photographer would eventually go to large format - 35mm was fine for me.

The second form is "such-and-such lens is garbage; don't touch it" and then recommending something way beyond the OP's budget - you have to respect the fact that we all have different budgets available to indulge in our hobby, and the best available for the budget is all the OP requires.

This is fun. Having a little rant now and then is good for you, in my opinion. Just try to avoid letting it make you bitter.

True, however, full frame allows for a different approach to photography.

Whether or not you consider that better or worse is up to you. If you shoot things and you like deep depth of field, and you don't like to get artsy with the shallow dof and faster lenses that come with full frame, that is okay.

mcluckie wrote in post #8632442
You never talked to agency art directors, did you?

Oh, and there is lessened image quality when the same number of pixels is crammed into a smaller sensor, but this isn't the thread for that.

I'm not saying FF doesn't have advantages, and yes ultimately image quality is better, just as large format is better than 35mm, but to say everyone should want to "upgrade" misses the point that 35mm, and these days APS-C might be good enough for most people.

usukshooter wrote in post #8630457
New one.... self righteous photojournalists who think their job is so much more important than yours and make it a point to attempt to make you feel like a nobody and then sneer in disgust when you actually stand up for yourself and talk back.

I showed up at a Heat game with a 50D instead of the mark II one day and one of the Miami Herald guys said, "Why the $@#% are you shooting a Nikon?" I just looked at him, pointed to the front of the camera, and said "Learn to read." Later that game he fired off 10 FPS and his 16-35L and missed the dunk, and I showed him a perfectly timed single shot frame of the dunk, no FPS involved, from a 50D + 28-135mm, and he shut up very fast.

I can't wait to see what he says when I show up with my D3...

Madweasel wrote in post #8633005
I'm not saying FF doesn't have advantages, and yes ultimately image quality is better, just as large format is better than 35mm, but to say everyone should want to "upgrade" misses the point that 35mm, and these days APS-C might be good enough for most people.

My peeve is that "full frame" has turned into some kind of a holy grail of photography. For those of us that are long time film shooters, FF is just a return to our roots. The limitations of technology at the beginning of digital photography forced the development of smaller sensors and "APS-C" was a convenient size because the manufacturers were already making cameras that size. I wonder how many of today's photographers even know what "APS"means? I would like the see the end of cropped sensor cameras and a return to 35mm sized sensors at all levels.

JWright wrote in post #8633341
My peeve is that "full frame" has turned into some kind of a holy grail of photography. For those of us that are long time film shooters, FF is just a return to our roots. The limitations of technology at the beginning of digital photography forced the development of smaller sensors and "APS-C" was a convenient size because the manufacturers were already making cameras that size. I wonder how many of today's photographers even know what "APS"means? I would like the see the end of cropped sensor cameras and a return to 35mm sized sensors at all levels.

Advanced Photo System. One of Kodak's formats, a.k.a. Advantix. I found it pretty annoying, though there were some niceties here and there.

Depth wrote in post #8630549
It can get worse. There are some people who constantly get Explored on Flickr who take absolutely terrible pictures and the only reason they have a ton of comments is due to people wanting to also get viewed.

What's Flickr??

Psychobiker wrote in post #8632135
http://img98.imageshac​k.us …62/dollbysmthfr​eshui1.jpg

That's unnatural

Over done skin smoothing is like a badly done boob job!!