Fujifilm's X-Pro1, now M Mount friendly
Olympus' Micro Four Thirds 75mm prime
Can you fix the focus on a blurry photo after the fact?
The birth of Mirrorless Cameras
The Joy Of Winning A Photo Contest
Choosing your first dSLR camera
New York City can be beautiful!
Choosing the Right Light Stand
Photojojo iPhone Telephoto Lens review — AudioCast
How To Buy Digital Photo Frames For An Exhibit - Part 2
Hey MAC users! A great source and an April Fool that is no joke
My week with Q
How To Become A Successful Photographer
"When the Wind Stopped" — poem with 4 photos
Creating The New Family Portrait
Tips for Textures 
Cast aways - saving those photographic memories
One Man Show: My 25 Years With Digital Photography
Studio, Flash, & Available Light — Three Books Reviewed
Portrait styling: dangerous pairings
Adobe Photoshop CS6 Product Managers Interview Audiocast
A gift of flowers: unfold your senses
On Set of "Love & Robots" the Film
No-Brainer Setup For A Digital Photo Frame Exhibit - Part 3
Exhibiting With Digital Photo Frames (DPF) Part 1
San Diego 7 photo gallery — Just Be Love All Stay Cool
Planning “National Geographic” style photo travel
Find Inner Peace and Beauty at San Jose, California, Airport
Wilderness Travel 1 Rainforests – Essential Gear
Backlighting Basics
What Moves You?
FIGURES IN MOTION: Decades of Evolving Personal Imagery in Photography, Part 7
Lomography Store, Austin, Texas — GALLERY
GALLERY — Up to $1,000 Reward for Cattle Rustlers
25% off on photography eBooks
eyePhone: The eBook for iPhone Photographers
Interview with Harold Davis — Closeup Maestro of Flowers & Water Drops
Interview with Steve Caplin — Photoshop Digital Artist, Commercial Illustrator, & Author
A Brief History Of Light & Photography: Part 3 of 3
A Brief History Of Light & Photography: Part 2 Of 3
Easy technique to select, edit and sequence keywords for web
How much should you charge for a photograph?June 20, 2011 @ 10:05AM
Top 10 Signs of a Bad Photographer
Not everyone out there with a DSLR is a good photographer. It's true. No really. There are endless discussions about it all over the Internet. Don't believe me? Do an image search of, well, just about anything and you'll see. That's okay though because we're all learning how to hone our craft, right?
So how do you spot the good photographers from the bad photographers?
And more importantly, how do you avoid looking like a bad photographer?
Well, I asked my Twitter followers if there were ways to identify a bad photographer and we've come up with a top ten list.
- @MinnesotaDogGuy "Too many to mention- #1 is the "anything goes" mentality-- more crap produced in the last 15 years than the previous100 years" Well, that sounds like a solid number 1 to me. And it's probably true. Maybe it's because digital photography makes it so easy to capture tons of pics but it's like nobody slows down anymore. Take your camera off burst mode, look a the scene, think about it, pause, think about it some more, then take a couple of shots and move on. Sure, there are times when you've got to take a ton of pics, but come on! I used to shoot weddings with film and when I hear of photographers who do it now and pop out thousands of photos on one wedding it kinda blows my mind. Too much spray and pray and you're giving yourself away.
- @moogyboobles "one who is all bitchy to newbies! If they are good then why should they worry about competition and put others down?" This one was hands down my favorite. We all started from somewhere and if you're not contributing anything positive to the conversation then you're acting like a bad photographer! Helping newer photographers out instead of putting them down would do wonders for your Karma and build your network as well.
- @sztyuiphoto "Using pop-up flash with telephoto lens in camera green mode:) And hold the camera in a very wrong unimaginable way:D" Sure, cameras are really great at doing most of the "work" for you these days, but really? The balance of technical know-how and artistic vision is what makes a good photographer. Besides, if you haven't learned how to hold your camera properly yet...
- @kuyman "Polarizer on indoors / shoots a whole roll with lens cap on (RF only, of course)." Yeah, if you're going to use a polarizer you should probably know what it's actually used for. Now, I do have to admit, I've taken a random shot here or there with the lens cap on but a whole roll?
- @rpwpb "Cutting off feet in a family snapshot." We're photographers not surgeons. 'Nuff said.
- @Ashtons "the same person in many of their portfolio shots" Yep, that's a sure sign you really haven't done that many shoots. Go get some more clients and then update your portfolio.
- @auryaun "example: only shoots "polaroids". Naughty photographer!" Wha? You mean I shouldn't be doing that anymore?
- @CLS_photo "someone who doesn't know what apeture is or what is does let alone how to change it." This goes along with that whole "P does not stand for Professional" argument and could also get classified with @isbalcio "shoots in auto mode". I got tons of those types of responses.
- @ChokingDrama "When most or all pictures have signs of camera shake." This basically means you don't understand shutter speed or perhaps it's relation to focal length. Either way...
- @mmurrayphoto "one who says they'll just "fix it" in lightroom/photoshop later after a bad exposure." and then added "anyone who uses "Photoshop" as a verb. #photoshopisnotaverb" Yep...Photoshop...let the arguments begin!
- @krowland3 "Focused more on gear than quality of images." I have nothing to add here. Nailed it!
Yeah, I know, we missed something or you completely disagree with one of the signs. Well, that's what the comments section is for. And go!
Photograph Lens cap by khiscott (Portway Ave : No Exit)
- Tagged with:
- bad photographer
- good photographer
Comments
Anyone who looks at your pictures and says, "You must have a really good camera."
COMPLETELY agree - this drives me crazy. Sure, the camera has something to do with it, but after seeing a great photo, *that's* your first question?
I usually say that Van Gogh had really good brushes!
He sure did.
Theo, his brother, bought them for him so they were probably the best money could buy.
Ach, yeah, it's often just the sign of a non-cognoscenti.
But if I'm feeling bitey, a fair response is "Yeah, and your mouth makes great compliments". :)
I actually choked from laughing so hard at that comment!
for a good photography camera dosent matters......
I once had someone tell me my camera must take really interesting pictures.
photoshoppppp'd
I get asked all the time. How do you get such great shots? What camera do you use? I saw its not the camera all the time!
Crazy
My response -- sorry... it was too long for the comments section and I thought justified more thought than a simple note: http://ow.ly/5oinS
Garrett, I am amazed to read how easy some people are offended and take everything so personally, in rersponse to your answer. You should have used your time to improve your skills instead of justifying your ignorance to the afore mentioned subject, in my opinion.
Clearly you have enough time to comment on other peoples opinions and that is what you are doing. Getting worked up about the opinion of other people you never even met, never bothered what they background is and so on. Just a stupid little rant of yours.
Why do you feel the need to compare yourself and your skills to others? Are you that insecure to care? Above Post is suggesting so!!! Sad and Pathetic really…!
If I’m “pathetic” for getting worked up and taking the time to respond to his article… Then does that make you “doubly-pathetic” for getting worked up and taking the time to respond to the guy who got worked up and took the time to respond to the article?
I’m kidding really, but welcome your opinion. As you can obviously tell by Damian’s original article and my response, we are all entitled to them. In many ways, I totally agree with you… it wasn’t the first time I wrote something based on a gut reaction… Probably won’t be the last. Live and learn, right? :-)
Thanks for your comment. My best to you, sir.
No, you're pathetic because all your points are stupid. Sorry.
My pet peeve is photographer behaviour. Believe it or not, I have been pushed out of the way by an overzealous photographer on several occasions. Ok, I understand this is your profession, and there may be money in that shot, but come on. Courtesy goes a long way.
Yeah, although that one swings both ways. I was brought up to walk around or wait for photographers, so there are few things more likely to rile me than inconsiderate idiots getting in the way of a photo.
I agree completely. I was also brought up to wait or walk behind photographers. Although sometimes my head is in the clouds and I have on occasion walked into shots, which I apologise for immediately. The occasions where I have been pushed (above) I have been standing still watching something (like a progression) or someone (like a crown prince greeting people) when a photographer has decided that I had a better vantage point than they did, and pushed me, and some children watching, out of the way. Surely that is not cool.
Of course, only very few photographers do this.
Few photographers is still too many when it comes to that kind of behavior.
I've had several try that on me before. Most notably at the mummers parade in Philly. I grabbed the dude's 200/2.8L by the barrel and shoved his camera body into his nose for it.
...for which I hope you were arrested, you offensive violent little piece of shit.
I think he meant it was in retaliation for a photographer shoving other people out of the way in an effort to get a shot. Not advocating violence, even in this situation, but I don't think he meant it in an aggressive way. Oh... and being from Philly (although I did leave before the city went all to shit)... I can say that such aggression is oddly tolerated there.
I can think of at least 3 angles to consider charging someone for that:
a) assault
b) (attempted) damage to equipment
c) breach of the peace
Coupled with which, answering violence with violence is deplorable and asinine.
Oy... alright... nevermind. I wasn't looking to get into that kind of conversation. Good day, sir.
I wasn't trying to damage the poor equipment, just the guy's nose. And he assaulted me first, if someone assaults me by shoving me out of the way I'm going to do something about it. Being a wimp about it is why people assume a 1DS is a license to shove people. And if I wanted to actually hurt the guy, I would probably have hit him.
The phrase, "Pardon me?" comes to mind? Few begrudge me a few seconds to record events, if I am courteous.
The camera around your neck doesn't give you any inherent right to be in a better position than anyone else. 99% of the time someone who walks in front of you did it either by accident or because they wanted to see the event too. At a sporting event especially, you need to be respectful of all attendees... Being a photographer confers no special viewing rights on you.
Well, bad photographers are newbie photographers because they really don;t know yet how to get a good shots perfectly, compared to professional photographers already.
Actor Headshots
I'm a month late to the conversation, but thought I'd throw in anyway.
In particular, I take exception with #5 in the list. Don't mistake "inexperienced photographer" for "bad photographer", and a "limited portfolio" isn't necessarily a "shitty portfolio". By that same token, don't confuse "quantity" for "quality".
The only thing you can know for sure is that a portfolio comprised of shitty photos is a shitty portfolio.
Shitty photos = shitty portfolio
Well said!
BTW - Never too late to join the conversation!
I know you have already said it, but I had compact camera for £120 and made photos like a Pro D-SLR. So is it about your camera after all...
Very true.
The hundreds - nay - thousands of "photographers" in the stands and arenas and events of the world who take flash pictures from distances so far from the subject that the sun itself might have trouble casting enough light.
If they do get useable photos it is due only to the stage illumination and/or the ambient light.
Yeah, it's always funny to see that in the stands at major events.
Off topic, but the futile flashing adds to the poetic essence of the "skyful of lighters."
I have to agree with more gear than knowledge. I know of one in particular that all he talks about at photo meets is what gear he has and how much he paid for it. Then you look at his photos, scratch your head, squint your eyes and say to yourself.....what the *&$ is that? lol
Someone who doesn't know how to spell aperture?
Jeff
Aprtur.
"Focused more on gear than quality of images."
No kidding. I'm new to the art of photography, and am shocked by how gear-focused some photographers are. It's like they are talking about cars or stereo systems.
Most visual artists don't do this - you won't go to an artist's opening and hear everyone talk about what kind of easel they have, or what brand of paint they prefer. All most people care about is how good their work is.
Whoa - sorry for the multiple comments - the site was buggy.
No worries Karen. It happens from time to time.
Much of this discussion seems to have mutated from "Bad photographer" to "Bad person".
Some folks seem incapable of civility and consideration for others. They are often the same ones whose speech is laced with profanities due to a limited vocabulary.
Mickey
Whoah now my speech is often "laced" with profanity and it has nothing to do with my vocabulary. Sometimes there is no equal to profanity for expressing certain thoughts or getting your point across.
TheDoc67
www.thedoc67.info
Hey Doc,
"Sometimes there is no equal to profanity for expressing certain thoughts or getting your point across."
To considerably paraphrase your phrase -
"Sometimes there is no equal to profanity for" - offending people or getting them to turn against your "point" of view simply because of the crude and repulsive way in which it is presented.
Mickey
Patient
I am a self taught photographer (I won't offend anyone by calling myself a professionl as I do not yet have a piece of paper to confirm that, but I am very busy), and I can't beleive how many persons with degrees in photography still rely on auto mode. I have a few "educated" friends that shoot weddings in auto mode, and their portfolios are horrendous. Yet they still manage to book weddings because they have a degree. I've decided to take the Professional Certified Photographer's exam and submit photos. Everytime, I mean EVERYTIME, I post new photos to my gallery, one of them asks me what equipment I was using. And everytime I tell them the same Canon 20D I've been using for 6 years. They have absolutely no concept of proper lighting, and exposure. Most of them have also never shot film. Very sad.
I agree there are both good and bad photographers out there, and its all too easy for anyone to buy a camera and say they are a photographer.
I totally agree that there is never any need for violence and my may problem has actually been the total opposite with not enough people in my shot, people being too polite so my shot doesn't have the same feel due to the lack of crowd.
One thing I must point out whilst shooting with the lens cap on is a silly thing to do, and not just for a newbie, it is also a more experienced photographers way to set exposure for a night shot.
My biggest pet peeve is the people who pick up a DSLR and think that they're a photographer now. Worse are the people who hire one of those to shoot a special occasion and then wonder why their pictures don't look as good as a professional's, even though they were shot on the same type of camera.
There is nothing wrong with an amateur photographer. He or she just needs to recognize that fact and be willing to learn. And seasoned photographers need to be willing to teach.
thanks for this useful post about photography . it was good reading.
headshots los angeles
My absolute biggest gripe with bad photographers is when the forehead lands dead center on the frame. I can just about guarantee anytime I hand my camera to someone, they will treat it like it's a sniper scope, and they're trying to hit me in the forehead.
This Lens Can Help you.
Canon EF 24-70mm
I've owned the 24-70mm for almost a year now. This lens has been a favorite of many since it replaced its well-regarded predecessor, the 28-70mm. It shoots images that are very sharp and have excellent contrast and saturation. It's sharp wide open and only gets better when stopping down. The USM (Ultrasonic Motor) focuses very fast, and full-time manual focusing is allowed. I've thought about buying a 50mm f/1.4, but the results from this lens are so good, I'm having a hard time justifying the purchase. I've been nothing but pleased with the pictures I get from the 24-70mm. The constant f/2.8 aperture is great for shooting indoors and produces a very nice bokeh (background blur) when shooting portraits. This lens is much heavier than comparable consumer-grade zooms, but I don't object to the weight. I actually like the heft and feel of this lens on my 20D. The only feature I wish it had is IS (image stabilization).
The one thing preventing an unqualified recommendation is the recent release of the Canon 24-105mm f/4.0L IS. The latter lens costs about the same and has some noteworthy advantages. It is .7" shorter, .2mm narrower and .6 lbs. lighter. It has 3rd generation IS that gives you a 3-stop shutter speed advantage when shooting handheld. I know from my 70-200mm f/2.8L IS that image stabilization is a very welcome feature when shooting handheld at slow shutter speeds. And, obviously, the 24-105mm adds an extra 35mm of focal length on the long end.
The 24-70mm bests the 24-105mm in one way: It's a faster lens. That translates into the following advantages: At f/4.0, the 24-105mm cannot stop subject motion blur as well in low-light situations where the 24-70mm's f/2.8 can give you a shutter speed that is twice as fast. Note that IS does not have any impact at all on subject motion blur, only on camera shake on your end. If bokeh (background blur) is important to you, the 24-70mm will have a slight advantage over the 24-105mm given its wider aperture. A wider aperture also helps a camera focus a little better in low light.
The first run of the 24-105mm had a flare problem (see Canon's Web site for more info), and the early production models have been recalled. But the problem has now been fixed. You'll have to consider your photography priorities when deciding which of these two excellent lenses best suits your needs. You would be well served by either.
Update 5-17-10: It's been 4 1/2 years since I wrote this review, and I continue to use and enjoy my 24-70mm, which is now paired with a Canon 7D. Anyone considering buying this lens today, however, should know that a major Canon rumors Web site is reporting Canon is getting ready to update this lens in 2010. There are reports that the mark II is currently being field tested, and the new version is rumored to have image stabilization. No doubt, a mark II with IS would cost significantly more than the current version. FWIW, Canon updated their 70-200mm f/2.8 IS earlier this year; the mark II version of that lens brought improved optics and the latest generation of IS, but it was priced $500 (MSRP) more than its predecessor. A mark II version of the 24-70mm would be adding IS to a lens that doesn't currently have that feature, so the increase in price could be even more than $500. Just something to consider as you plan your purchases.
All I bought at the price $1,289.94 dollars from website amazon.
Or you may access information from this link.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00009R6WT/tipfla-20
I think where everyone must have. I believe you will get a very good experience like me.
----
And other Best lens for canon camera this link :
http://astore.amazon.com/can0n-lens-camera-20
by : http://www.moviestom.com/sale/
In RE Polaroids: One of the modern photo greats Robert Maplethorpe worked in a large percentage with Polaroid, and there may now be a rebirth...
Post new comment