login info join!
Forums > General Industry > A "Drives You Up The WALL!" Issue With Photos Search   Reply
1234last
Photographer
Jonathan Souza
Posts: 31
Richmond, California, US


Does anybody have an issue that when they see a photo, it instantly ruins it, completely and totally makes the shot not work?

For me, it's unsafe gun handling.  Fingers on triggers in circumstances that don't dictate it, poor gun form, muzzles being pointed in any direction that is not RIGHT, etc, etc...  It drives me up the wall and there was one model that I damn near slapped after the third time she pointed a (prop) gun at her head in a silly casual manner with the finger on the trigger.
Dec 01 12 12:33 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Marc Damon
Posts: 6,562
Biloxi, Mississippi, US


Jonathan Souza wrote:
Does anybody have an issue that when they see a photo, it instantly ruins it, completely and totally makes the shot not work?

Train tracks.

Dec 01 12 12:37 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Good Egg Productions
Posts: 14,699
Orlando, Florida, US


I think that anyone with extensive experience in a particular field will find faults in how that given field is portrayed in photographs.

The ability to look past these "flaws" for sake of the image is essential to appreciate the photograph. If you can't, then that's your loss.
Dec 01 12 12:51 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Harold Rose
Posts: 2,925
Calhoun, Georgia, US


Jonathan Souza wrote:
Does anybody have an issue that when they see a photo, it instantly ruins it, completely and totally makes the shot not work?

For me, it's unsafe gun handling.  Fingers on triggers in circumstances that don't dictate it, poor gun form, muzzles being pointed in any direction that is not RIGHT, etc, etc...  It drives me up the wall and there was one model that I damn near slapped after the third time she pointed a (prop) gun at her head in a silly casual manner with the finger on the trigger.

I wonder if you are communicating effectivly ,   seems as if you are not.

Dec 01 12 12:52 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
BTHPhoto
Posts: 6,723
Fairbanks, Alaska, US


Jonathan Souza wrote:
Does anybody have an issue that when they see a photo, it instantly ruins it, completely and totally makes the shot not work?

Clothes.

Dec 01 12 12:53 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
BTHPhoto
Posts: 6,723
Fairbanks, Alaska, US


Harold Rose wrote:

I wonder if you are communicating effectivly ,   seems as if you are not.

+1

Dec 01 12 12:53 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Drew Smith Photography
Posts: 5,011
Nottingham, England, United Kingdom


Gas Masks.

Why?

Especially from the llama's point of view.
Dec 01 12 12:56 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Jonathan Souza
Posts: 31
Richmond, California, US


No, the model was an idiot.  Three times, after the second one I gave her my firearms safety lecture (short version-never point it anything you don't want to shoot, always know where the muzzle is, never put your finger on the trigger unless you plan on shooting THAT INSTANT, etc), and the costume theme we were working with was "special operations soldier".

Gah!

Harold Rose wrote:
I wonder if you are communicating effectively, seems as if you are not.

Dec 01 12 12:58 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
NYMPH
Posts: 589
Oakland, California, US


Cutting off toes.

I'm a huge fan of proper cropping. It's great. Make it dynamic, cut me anywhere that makes the picture stronger.

If you crop me at the toes, or awkwardly cut off me feet, I make the squinty mad face at the computer screen, especially if it was an otherwise fantastic picture.

(Yes, this is is influenced by residual dancer foot obsessions.)
Dec 01 12 01:47 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
PhotographybyT
Posts: 7,556
Monterey, California, US


NYMPH wrote:
Cutting off toes.

http://cdnimg.visualizeus.com/thumbs/30/30/funny,positive,smile,faces,lick,cute-303009bc2a33d724b3a823e83dba61bd_h.jpg

Dec 01 12 01:54 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Paul AI
Posts: 857
Shawnee, Oklahoma, US


Marc Damon wrote:
Train tracks.

Lol +1

Dec 01 12 01:56 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
NYMPH
Posts: 589
Oakland, California, US


Dec 01 12 01:56 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
SitronStudio
Posts: 1,056
Venice, Florida, US


Um, just guns in general.
Dec 01 12 03:34 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
M Pandolfo Photography
Posts: 12,113
Tampa, Florida, US


Good Egg Productions wrote:
I think that anyone with extensive experience in a particular field will find faults in how that given field is portrayed in photographs.

The ability to look past these "flaws" for sake of the image is essential to appreciate the photograph. If you can't, then that's your loss.

Absolutely. We do it with movies all the time. Suspended disbelief. If you can't get past that then it's just not a quality image to begin with and the flaw only adds to the poor experience.

I know Paul Newman can't eat 50 hard-boiled eggs but I still loved Cool Hand Luke.

Dec 01 12 03:37 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Art of the nude
Posts: 11,748
Olivet, Michigan, US


Jonathan Souza wrote:
Does anybody have an issue that when they see a photo, it instantly ruins it, completely and totally makes the shot not work?

For me, it's unsafe gun handling.  Fingers on triggers in circumstances that don't dictate it, poor gun form, muzzles being pointed in any direction that is not RIGHT, etc, etc...  It drives me up the wall and there was one model that I damn near slapped after the third time she pointed a (prop) gun at her head in a silly casual manner with the finger on the trigger.

I very rarely see model photos involving guns, and may litterally have never taken one, so that's not really an issue for me.

Other than obvious technical things, I don't have one such concern, although selective color comes close, along with really cliche "hand bra" shots.

Dec 01 12 03:39 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
JMHSPhoto
Posts: 412
Windsor, Ontario, Canada


Despite how others will try and justify the uses of some of the more....over killed cliche'd type shots. It's all horse shit.

Are there instances where the use of guns, train tracks, guitars, angel's wings (the list goes on) are Ok ? Sure. When the post work has been applied to them in such a way that it's not a crappy lit snap shot.

And as cute as the old lady used to be asking me "Where's the Beef?" on that commercial... there was a limit to how many times I could see it and hear it. So goes those above mentioned images.

Did I forget to mention selective color grabs ?
Dec 01 12 03:56 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
E e v a
Posts: 1,723
Nashville, Tennessee, US


When people do a military/vintage military shoot, and are trying to be realistic, wear the uniform at least somewhat accurately. And if it's not realistic, don't disrespect the uniform (of any military). Its just about tact. And if you cant do that, just do a costume of it.
Dec 01 12 03:57 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Star
Posts: 17,897
Los Angeles, California, US


Good Egg Productions wrote:
I think that anyone with extensive experience in a particular field will find faults in how that given field is portrayed in photographs.

The ability to look past these "flaws" for sake of the image is essential to appreciate the photograph. If you can't, then that's your loss.

I disagree. If a photographer can't show respect for the subject they are shooting they shouldn't photograph it. It is one thing to have the knowledge and tweak it or play with it, it is something entirely different to not even bother to learn about what you want to create so you can create it in a manner that is inline with reality.

As an example if you want to emulate certain film stocks then actually look at those stocks. Don't just put on a grunge texture, set it to hard light, and call it a successful collodion.

Dec 01 12 04:02 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Star
Posts: 17,897
Los Angeles, California, US


JMHSPhoto wrote:
Despite how others will try and justify the uses of some of the more....over killed cliche'd type shots. It's all horse shit.

Are there instances where the use of guns, train tracks, guitars, angel's wings (the list goes on) are Ok ? Sure. When the post work has been applied to them in such a way that it's not a crappy lit snap shot.

And as cute as the old lady used to be asking me "Where's the Beef?" on that commercial... there was a limit to how many times I could see it and hear it. So goes those above mentioned images.

Did I forget to mention selective color grabs ?

my new favorite angel

http://cdn.fearnet.com/sites/default/files/images/News/TV/ahs_207.jpg

Dec 01 12 04:08 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Red Sky Photography
Posts: 3,180
Germantown, Maryland, US


Good Egg Productions wrote:
I think that anyone with extensive experience in a particular field will find faults in how that given field is portrayed in photographs.

The ability to look past these "flaws" for sake of the image is essential to appreciate the photograph. If you can't, then that's your loss.

I agree. I used to have an image of a girl dressed as a rock star playing a guitar. The guitar was a cheap Sears electric. Some photographer commented that i should have used a Fender Stratocaster to make it more believable. As if I wanted to spend $1000 on a prop, or that some people don't actually play with cheap guitars.

Dec 01 12 05:03 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
rp_photo
Posts: 42,470
Houston, Texas, US


Jonathan Souza wrote:
Does anybody have an issue that when they see a photo, it instantly ruins it, completely and totally makes the shot not work?

Hair bands, which can be edited out but annoy the heck out of me.

The model gets everything right but the nails.

Intrusive logos that cover any part of the subject.

Most tilts and vignettes.

Dec 01 12 05:05 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Marc Damon
Posts: 6,562
Biloxi, Mississippi, US


Red Sky Photography wrote:
I agree. I used to have an image of a girl dressed as a rock star playing a guitar. The guitar was a cheap Sears electric. Some photographer commented that i should have used a Fender Stratocaster to make it more believable. As if I wanted to spend $1000 on a prop, or that some people don't actually play with cheap guitars.

Not a git but here you go. Just need someone to work on the bg wink

http://photos.modelmayhem.com/photos/100311/14/4b9975871b765_m.jpg

Dec 01 12 07:37 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
rfordphotos
Posts: 4,412
Antioch, California, US


I wont say it drives me up the wall, but I cringe a bit when I see a US flag "abused".

Before anyone jumps on me, I am a Vet who believes I took an oath to preserve your right to do pretty much as you please with the flag....but that doesnt mean I dont cringe a bit sometimes.
Dec 01 12 08:25 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
Christina Josephine
Posts: 121
Warsaw, Indiana, US


Jonathan Souza wrote:
Does anybody have an issue that when they see a photo, it instantly ruins it, completely and totally makes the shot not work?

For me, it's unsafe gun handling.  Fingers on triggers in circumstances that don't dictate it, poor gun form, muzzles being pointed in any direction that is not RIGHT, etc, etc...  It drives me up the wall and there was one model that I damn near slapped after the third time she pointed a (prop) gun at her head in a silly casual manner with the finger on the trigger.

I'm not against firearms- but I am against a firearm being pointed at anyone, including one's self. My dad lost his left eye when he was 13. A friend pointed an air rifle in  his face and pulled the trigger. The air pressure obliterated his eye. No good.

Dec 01 12 08:39 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
DAN CRUIKSHANK
Posts: 1,774
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada


Fake blood. I don't like it.
Dec 01 12 08:39 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
KSBPHOTOSdotCOM
Posts: 112
Tracy, California, US


Medical Shots when the stethoscope/insturment if handled used incorrectly.

On tv/film; "photographers" who hold an SLR like an etch-a-sketch
Dec 01 12 08:39 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
M A R C P H O T O
Posts: 258
Mission Hills, California, US


BTHPhoto wrote:

Clothes.

+1

Dec 01 12 08:44 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
rp_photo
Posts: 42,470
Houston, Texas, US


Poorly-done (as in most) dark images.
Dec 01 12 08:45 pm  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Model
MB Jen B
Posts: 2,462
Anchorage, Alaska, US


Jonathan Souza wrote:
Does anybody have an issue that when they see a photo, it instantly ruins it, completely and totally makes the shot not work?

...

I do.

Shooting down on a model in a manner that makes them look peculiarly distorted with a big head and short body and also shooting at an angle that looks distortedly, unintetionally corpsish, (again, this is another bad angle shooting down situation.)

I have had nicely done shots that the photographer shot 'down' however my peeve is the bad version. It is just so unpleasant to my eye to see someone squashed or distortedly elongated, showing bad lines.

Also, gore.
Jen

Dec 02 12 12:14 pm  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Model
MB Jen B
Posts: 2,462
Anchorage, Alaska, US


NYMPH wrote:
Cutting off toes.

I'm a huge fan of proper cropping. It's great. Make it dynamic, cut me anywhere that makes the picture stronger.

If you crop me at the toes, or awkwardly cut off me feet, I make the squinty mad face at the computer screen, especially if it was an otherwise fantastic picture.

(Yes, this is is influenced by residual dancer foot obsessions.)

Hello Nymph,

smile I agree. It may be more than just residual dancer foot thinking but, I do not know any woman who do NOT care about their feet.

Here is a quote from a 1948 French shoe designer found on the vogue site:

“Every woman is not only conscious of her feet, but sex-conscious of them,”[3] Perugia once said.

quotes at the bottom of the article:
http://www.vogue.com/voguepedia/The_Stiletto

I'm with you in this Nymph.
Jen

rfordphotos wrote:
I wont say it drives me up the wall, but I cringe a bit when I see a US flag "abused".

Before anyone jumps on me, I am a Vet who believes I took an oath to preserve your right to do pretty much as you please with the flag....but that doesnt mean I dont cringe a bit sometimes.

I'm with you on this one too.

Flag code link
http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagcode.htm

Dec 02 12 12:19 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
J O H N A L L A N
Posts: 9,489
Santa Ana, California, US


So much of the touristy 'HDR' stuff. So over it.
Dec 02 12 12:22 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Woven Thought
Posts: 328
Petersburg, Virginia, US


Oh yes, I hate cut off at the ankle.  Aaahhhhhh!  I don't think I've seen it, but cut off at the wrist would do it too. 

The majority of hand bras annoy me too.  I've never known women to just hang around cupping their breasts, it is just forced.  Blah
Dec 02 12 12:29 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
A N D E R S O N
Posts: 2,553
Garden Grove, California, US


SitronStudio wrote:
Um, just guns in general.

+1

Unless it was a guy that looked like the Brawny paper towel man in the woods holding a duck and a rifle. Lol you know, it's got to make sense.

Dec 02 12 12:33 pm  Link  Quote 
Makeup Artist
Lauren Reynolds Makeup
Posts: 282
London, England, United Kingdom


High heels which are too big
Dec 02 12 12:45 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Imageography
Posts: 6,753
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada


I find nothing irritates me in an image because if I choose to be irritated, there will be no doubt images I have shot over the past 35 years that will irritate others.

I choose to just move on from images I don't find appealing rather than sacrifice a concept just because it may be deemed irritating.
Dec 02 12 12:59 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Jerry Nemeth
Posts: 25,900
Dearborn, Michigan, US


Prop gun

http://photos.modelmayhem.com/photos/110427/14/4db884e524ec0.jpg
Dec 02 12 01:08 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Jeffrey M Fletcher
Posts: 4,300
Asheville, North Carolina, US


I'll give a pass to bathing suit shots without much consideration.
Dec 02 12 01:14 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
intense_puppy
Posts: 862
Brighton, England, United Kingdom


Damn, you guys need to chill.

Star wrote:
I disagree. If a photographer can't show respect for the subject they are shooting they shouldn't photograph it. It is one thing to have the knowledge and tweak it or play with it, it is something entirely different to not even bother to learn about what you want to create so you can create it in a manner that is inline with reality.

There is the thought that some photographers go out to disrespect certain subject to make a statement or whatever.
I respect those photographers smile

Star wrote:
As an example if you want to emulate certain film stocks then actually look at those stocks. Don't just put on a grunge texture, set it to hard light, and call it a successful collodion.

Actually, damn, this is something that annoys me.
If you want something to look like film then shoot film - it's cheap and easy (But if you're just mucking around with Instagram type filters, that's fine with me - just don't call it film.....)

(I feel better now.....)

Dec 02 12 01:24 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
M Pandolfo Photography
Posts: 12,113
Tampa, Florida, US


OK, here's a pet peeve. 99.4% of the male model avatars.

Is there just one pair of bikini briefs that are passed around from model to model? Or does every male model feel the need to present their marble pouch to the viewing public?
Dec 02 12 01:25 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Kawika Photography
Posts: 110
San Diego, California, US


Leading lines with a disappointing payoff. Kind of like following cookie crumbs and finding an empty bag at the end. Cheers
Dec 02 12 01:29 pm  Link  Quote 
1234last   Search   Reply



main | browse | casting/travel | forums | shout box | help | advertising | contests | share | join the mayhem

more modelmayhem on: | | | edu

©2006-2014 ModelMayhem.com. All Rights Reserved.
MODEL MAYHEM is a registered trademark.
Toggle Worksafe Mode: Off | On
Terms | Privacy | Careers