So I ran into this site called You Are Not A Photographer.
It is a huge collection of photoshop and photo massacres. I hope no one here has any photos there, but I somehow think...
Anyway, many of the photos appear to have been taken from public photographer Facebook pages.
I guess it is real easy to blame photographers for crappy ideas, but some of the things posted on this site clearly show that the "client" has specifically asked to have their pictures hacked all to shit, thus making a mediocre photographer into a crappy photochopper.
I guess what I walk away with, after having seen the disasters on the website, was that photoshop can be used as a weapon of mass destruction in the wrong hands.
In my early days, I thought that I could use photoshop to save an otherwise uninteresting, poorly composed, crappy shot. Occasionally I am still guilty of this crime.
But after seeing this site full of disasters, I am going to think twice about "artistic" alterations or manipulations in the future.
Maybe that's why I don't use Photoshop. I'm afraid I'd do more harm than good. I've played with a couple of lesser programs and soon realized... I'm nowhere near being able to call myself a digital artist or photo retoucher.
L Bass wrote: Maybe that's why I don't use Photoshop. I'm afraid I'd do more harm than good. I've played with a couple of lesser programs and soon realized... I'm nowhere near being able to call myself a digital artist or photo retoucher.
+1 Why I normally pay for such services! (bows in respect to Retouchers.....)
And, another good reason to make sure no one touches your photos after delivery. Who say's every photo on aforementioned site was delivered that way? I would hate to see some of my stuff on there hacked to pieces!
KonstantKarma
Posts: 2,066
Asheville, North Carolina, US
It's a great site, someone posted it here last year and I bookmarked it.
A lot of the photos come from modelmayhem members and facebook 'photography' pages. Ironically, I had one of them do a comment trade with me here the same day his was featured on the site.
No, I did not comment "I saw this pic today somewhere else too!"
The guy certainly has his dislikes - Selective coloring is a no. Nasty baby bumps (bad angles, light, things that make them look gross versus motherly) are a no. Horrible 'shopping is a no. Nothing in focus is a no. Random props that don't make sense are a no.
I've found looking at truly horrible photographs helps me improve my skills just as much as looking at great ones.
Thanks for putting me onto this site. It is funny, until you see the 100th one, then it starts to get more than a little sad. I agree, a great way to learn how to make good photographs is to study bad ones, but if you are so bad you can learn much from these, chances are you are so clueless you do not realize just how bad you are.
It is a general problem. Read this article very carefully, if you think it applies to you, then it doesn't; if you think it does not apply to you, then it does:
That is rather delightfully hilarious. Thank you for introducing it to us! Though, I would be horribly horrified if one of my old, old shots from when I was wee youngin' without much sense shows up there.
Wow. As an amateur photographer and user of photoshop, I am so glad to say my work is much better than that . . . Whew . . . (although the bar there is set so low)
Very entertaining and educational on what not to do : )
I've been following that site for a while, its a hoot!
Another humorous one is MWACattack on Youtube. She seems to tutor the 3 month camera owners turning pro and has a crazy fan base. Its amazing how many folks take her seriously!
I'm debating checking the site out but after reading the comments I'm not sure if I need another distraction that's going to suck me in. Aww who am I fooling...heading there now.
You won't learn ANYTHING by wasting your time looking at crappy images. All you'll do, when it comes time for you to do a shoot, is develop a case of creative block, because you have nothing to serve as inspiration.
The site is good for a laugh, but be careful not to spend too much time looking out for the same thing in other portfolios. Otherwise, your stuff just might end up there one day.
I know just enough about Photoshop to be dangerous. However, I made a decision when I began shooting to keep the raw images along with my PS work. I can go back to the totally unedited image at anytime. I have an album on FB that is titled Before and After. I always find the original vs edited images the most fascinating.
My all-time favorite faux move often occurs on this site, in the photography section. When talking about a particular lens and how sharp it is, someone will put up a pic where the subject has been Gaussian-blurred into plastic - to show how sharp it is. Head desk.
L Bass wrote: Maybe that's why I don't use Photoshop. I'm afraid I'd do more harm than good. I've played with a couple of lesser programs and soon realized... I'm nowhere near being able to call myself a digital artist or photo retoucher.
Yes it takes some time to learn to do photo retouching, in the 40's most retouching was done on the film,. and finished up on the prints. Many new tricks were thought up over the years, Photoshop, is not some thing new. It is just the old methods adapted to computer.. Thank Heaven, it is so much easier, Yes if you expect to be a pro,, expect to apply the time and effort..
Porsche Jones
Posts: 184
Portsmouth, New Hampshire, US
TJ Day wrote: I guess it is real easy to blame photographers for crappy ideas, but some of the things posted on this site clearly show that the "client" has specifically asked to have their pictures hacked all to shit, thus making a mediocre photographer into a crappy photochopper.
There is an episode of My Little Pony about this. Specifically in which Rarity is pressured by her clients (the other ponies) to abandon her creative instincts in favor of their guidance because "the customer is always right." Then, when the art critic pony comes to her show, he is repulsed by her schizophrenic portfolio and over-the-top designs.
Episode 14, "Suited for Success." Also see the song, "The Art of the Dress."
I just felt this needed to be said as it is an extremely relevant expose of the issue at hand.
We've seen the site as well - it was posted on Fark sometime back. None of our photos were there (thank the Goddess - I guess he just missed us). Joe does not do photoshop, Nancy does and does it very well. She has been working on sharpening her skills for several years and now does photographic restoration in addition to all the rest.
(bows in respect to Retouchers.....)
| 
| 
| edu