Kelleth wrote: My husband was a marine and ALWAYS comments on improper gun handling in movies and photos too. I always see it too now.
I'm an old-school martial arts student (i.e. no tournament legal BS) who has studied physiology and anatomy. Hollywood combat in general bothers me because it's so blatantly bogus... and because so many "martial arts" schools have obviously modeled their tripe after it. This is how McDojos come to be.
In stills, flat lighting and eyes that aren't sharp bug me. They're indicative of lousy technique combined with carelessness.
Secondary annoyances are illogical mergers, like when a subject seems to have a telephone pole growing out of his/her head.
Razor burn or obvious signs of careless shaving of body hair.
Portraits with out of focus eyes.
Wrinkled white sheet backdrops.
Over photoshopped skin textures.
Beer bellies on swimsuit models.
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.)
This. And chopping off feet, hands, fingers, arms, legs (at strange places). Also poses where one arm (for example) is hidden behind the model, making her appear to be an amputee.
And no, I'm not a dancer. lol
Also split profiles, "almost profiles" where the nose breaks the far cheek like and often hides part of the eye that's farther from the camera, and eyes where all the white is on one side of the eyes.
I'm old school. I was taught that photos should show two hands (at least four fingers per hand), two arms (with no "stubs," two legs and two feet.
There are lots of people who don't pay attention to these things now - but there are plenty of photo editors and art directors who still do.
This. And chopping off feet, hands, fingers, arms, legs (at strange places). Also poses where one arm (for example) is hidden behind the model, making her appear to be an amputee.
And no, I'm not a dancer. lol
Also split profiles, "almost profiles" where the nose breaks the far cheek like and often hides part of the eye that's farther from the camera, and eyes where all the white is on one side of the eyes.
I'm old school. I was taught that photos should show two hands (at least four fingers per hand), two arms (with no "stubs," two legs and two feet.
There are lots of people who don't pay attention to these things now - but there are plenty of photo editors and art directors who still do.
Models leaning chest first against alleyway walls or corrugated Iron. c'mon guys, this doesn't work and doesn't even make sense as an image.
Snapshot style nude work in hotel rooms.
Girls on motorbikes (unless the subject is a motorcyclist). This includes the model wearing only an unzipped leather and her underpants. Just gauche.
SI style bikini shots.
Crops below the knees.
Lomography. Whether real or digital.
Profile photos of models in Orange dresses with defocused rocks in the background.
Ooh. I just remembered the worst one. Models with violins who clearly aren't violinist. The bowhand just makes me cringe. Same for guitar girl photos. Teach her an E form bar chord at least.
cupacake_Hearts
Posts: 26
Bishop's Stortford, England, United Kingdom
I'm new but, a few things bug me even before I started modelling:
Photo's where the model looks plastic!
Awful photoshopping - it happens in professional photos too there was an article recently about Xtina Aguilra and how she was butchered at the photoshop end.
Unflattering angels that clearly didn't work - as a plus size model angels are so important to me DUCK FACE MAKES ME WANT TO HURT PEOPLE. Seriously, why do it?! STAPH
Models that tag their photos ''me innit'' on a professional side such as MM PP and NM just ruins the whole photo regardless of how awesome it is or was!
People who don't take the time to look after their whole appearance, and don't take their hair bands off their wrists.
Photos that seem to represent the following scenario: the model is sitting there with her legs spread open, showing the lady bits, in a completely unnatural pose or one that looks like it was quit obviously intended to show off her lady bits. Nothing else in the photo makes her spread legs make sense. Often she is sitting on a table or a pool table or something similar, or a bed. It is not the idea of showing the lady bits that bothers me, it is that there seems to be no purpose for it other than the fact that she is doing it. Add in the fact that she is fully dressed otherwise or if you really want it, have her breast shoved unnaturally out of one side of her top too I have no problem with abstract or artistic close-ups, or erotic shots (as those tend to have some little storyline), etc. I just want there to be some sort of reason and for it to make sense. Otherwise it just looks like the photographer talked her into it or hired her just because she with spread her legs for the camera. Sorry... it just bugs me.
Blaine Dixon
Posts: 962
San Francisco, California, US
Christina Josephine wrote:
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.
Thing is this is a form of "Show Business" models are actors in a way, what if the script called for 1. Suicide, 2. Holding someone at gunpoint 3. a Holdup???
Dry skin (moisturize FFS!!)
HDR
winking
''open mouth, blank stare'' posing
when photographers get this idea that ''ooh lets smear the nude model in body paint'' and call it nude art....no It's just a nude model smeared in paint, there is nothing artsy about it....
Besides getting inspired from the trully great artists out there I really dont care what other people are shooting.
I mean what am I the photo police? Shoot all the angel wings, caution tape and train tracks you want. If it makes you happy who am I to tell you not to do it or to criticize your work.
I can remember when I first started out and I pretty much sucked a$$. But after making a million or so mistakes I’ve gotten a little better. Hopefully I will continue to screw up and shoot stuff that nobody will like from time to time so I can continue to learn and grow as an artist.
Sorry for the rant. I just get annoyed from all the posts ranting about other photographers work all the time...
It's so sad when a photographer shows me an amazing image in the viewfinder, then completely ruins it in Photoshop with blurred skin, etc. *CRINGE* Totally unnecessary.
Models who choose horrible images for their Avi's. Sometimes it's a full body shot taken from a distance, others use low key shots. You can't see their face or their body - which is what they're trying to market!
I know I do a lot of things that probably drive people crazy, but I'm starting to think having all these rules is really limiting. As long as I'm having fun, screw it, I don't want your rules!
Tansy Blue
Posts: 315
London, England, United Kingdom
Poor attention to detail.
Not that I'm always innocent of this (although I will reshoot an image once twice thrice and so on if I feel like something key can be improved), but when every shot has things protruding into the background, flyaway hair, fingers cut off, etc...can't cope.
Also models who have clearly been shot from eye height and so look much shorter than they really are. Photographers, get down on your bellies!
John Peralta wrote: Models who choose horrible images for their Avi's. Sometimes it's a full body shot taken from a distance, others use low key shots. You can't see their face or their body - which is what they're trying to market!
Aaaaaarrrrrrrggggggg!!!
Especially when I've given them obvioulsy better images that never make it into their ports.
For one (from a gay man's point of view), I hate seeing any kind of nude MALE model where the male model is like 110 pounds with fake blonde hair, orange skin, and zero muscle tone.
Photographers who don't send you "good" photos that you've both agreed on. I've worked with photographers who let me look at my shots as I go along. Sometimes, I've said, "Oooh, I really love that one!" and they agree, but then not only do I not get that photo back, but I get legitimately cringeworthy photos that I don't use for my port.
Samantha Emme wrote: 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.
THIS.
I love a good military pin up, camo and mud glamour shot.... but I HATE seeing the current uniforms deconstructed with tits and ass hanging out. Leave that for private photos between a gf/spouse and her soldier. That's... ugh, it's disrespectful to me, that's not what the uniform is about. That's what costumes are for. To each their own and free speech and all that BS, just remember that there is a HUGE group of people who's lives are represented by that uniform. People who take it very seriously and put a lot of heart/soul/blood/sweat into it.
I also really hate toilet shots. WTF.
Edit: I am oh so guilty of some of this... hand bra anyone? You can't make me stoooop!
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.
Reality/realism is a somewhat overrated concept.
Special Agent Leroy Jethro Gibbs drives from Washington Navy Yard to Norfolk Naval Base in 25 minutes.
Scarlett Renee wrote: I love a good military pin up, camo and mud glamour shot.... but I HATE seeing the current uniforms deconstructed with tits and ass hanging out. Leave that for private photos between a gf/spouse and her soldier. That's... ugh, it's disrespectful to me, that's not what the uniform is about.
Agreed. Politicians deserve our contempt, not the soldiers who are in the line of fire.
I also really hate toilet shots. WTF.
I don't understand this one either. Apparently it's not just me
wings. They drive me 
I have no problem with abstract or artistic close-ups, or erotic shots (as those tend to have some little storyline), etc. I just want there to be some sort of reason and for it to make sense. Otherwise it just looks like the photographer talked her into it or hired her just because she with spread her legs for the camera. Sorry... it just bugs me.
| 
| 
| edu