Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(C|Net)   Do you take a lot of pics with your camera phone? Are you sure?   (news.cnet.com ) divider line
    More: Obvious, art museums, galaxies  
•       •       •

6127 clicks; posted to Geek » on 10 Dec 2013 at 11:23 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



72 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-12-10 11:29:42 AM  
Cause <-> Effect

Does taking lots of photos cause you to have a bad memory or does a bad memory compel you to take lots of photos?
 
2013-12-10 11:32:21 AM  
Is this a repeat?
 
2013-12-10 11:47:01 AM  
Or, maybe it's a poorly designed study that said "you take pics of art" and "you look at the art" and the picture takers were more focused on taking pics.
 
2013-12-10 11:47:02 AM  
Leonard would never survive today's world

2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-12-10 11:48:21 AM  
meh... someone that knows how to take pictures would observe to whole area, and visualize every possible angle, the approach, the lighting, the colours, the white balance, before the camera is even up.

But everyone's a photographer now...or so they think.
 
2013-12-10 11:50:42 AM  

ampoliros: Cause <-> Effect

Does taking lots of photos cause you to have a bad memory or does a bad memory compel you to take lots of photos?


Luckily actual scientists understand experimental design, and try and address issues like that if at all possible. Here is the abstract of the actual study:

Two studies examined whether photographing objects impacts what is remembered about them. Participants were led on a guided tour of an art museum and were directed to observe some objects and to photograph others. Results showed a photo-taking-impairment effect: If participants took a photo of each object as a whole, they remembered fewer objects and remembered fewer details about the objects and the objects' locations in the museum than if they instead only observed the objects and did not photograph them. However, when participants zoomed in to photograph a specific part of the object, their subsequent recognition and detail memory was not impaired, and, in fact, memory for features that were not zoomed in on was just as strong as memory for features that were zoomed in on. This finding highlights key differences between people's memory and the camera's "memory" and suggests that the additional attentional and cognitive processes engaged by this focused activity can eliminate the photo-taking-impairment effect.

So apparently, photographing objects impairs our ability to remember details about them versus if we are tasked to merely observe the object. However, doing a focused task, like photographing only part of the picture, does not.
 
2013-12-10 11:55:58 AM  

dj_bigbird: Or, maybe it's a poorly designed study that said "you take pics of art" and "you look at the art" and the picture takers were more focused on taking pics.


I just glanced through some of the methods. Participants were taken to objects and instructed to observe them then asked to either photograph or continue observing. Lots of parts of the experiment were geared towards maximizing later recall.
 
2013-12-10 12:05:01 PM  
Wow, you mean the tossers who "live" their life through their phone and social media are morons that don't know the value of actually living and tend to make all of their experiences completely forgettable because they're too busy taking pictures and pretending that other people are going to care?

I'm shocked.
 
2013-12-10 12:24:10 PM  
No, I take pictures with a SLR.

fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net

fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net

fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net

scontent-b-lax.xx.fbcdn.net

scontent-a-lax.xx.fbcdn.net
 
2013-12-10 12:27:35 PM  

Alexei Novikov: Wow, you mean the tossers who "live" their life through their phone and social media are morons that don't know the value of actually living and tend to make all of their experiences completely forgettable because they're too busy taking pictures and pretending that other people are going to care?

I'm shocked.


Heh wow dude, you should put some cream on that.
 
2013-12-10 12:30:08 PM  

lordargent: No, I take pictures with a SLR.

[fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net image 850x206]

[fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net image 850x566]

[fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net image 850x169]

[scontent-b-lax.xx.fbcdn.net image 720x149]

[scontent-a-lax.xx.fbcdn.net image 720x185]



Is your only lense a wide angle?
 
2013-12-10 12:30:17 PM  

lordargent: No, I take pictures with a SLR.

[fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net image 850x206]

[fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net image 850x566]

[fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net image 850x169]

[scontent-b-lax.xx.fbcdn.net image 720x149]

[scontent-a-lax.xx.fbcdn.net image 720x185]


So THATS where that highway goes.
 
2013-12-10 12:36:02 PM  

Saiga410: lordargent: No, I take pictures with a SLR.

[fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net image 850x206]

[fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net image 850x566]

[fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net image 850x169]

[scontent-b-lax.xx.fbcdn.net image 720x149]

[scontent-a-lax.xx.fbcdn.net image 720x185]


Is your only lense a wide angle?


Man, he must have been really freakin' close to those Blue Angels to get a shot like that from a wide angle lens.
 
2013-12-10 12:45:30 PM  

dj_bigbird: Or, maybe it's a poorly designed study that said "you take pics of art" and "you look at the art" and the picture takers were more focused on taking pics.


This
 
2013-12-10 12:46:12 PM  
croesius:
Man, he must have been really freakin' close to those Blue Angels to get a shot like that from a wide angle lens.

200thsentai.com
 
2013-12-10 12:46:48 PM  

imfallen_angel: meh... someone that knows how to take pictures would observe to whole area, and visualize every possible angle, the approach, the lighting, the colours, the white balance, before the camera is even up.

But everyone's a photographer now...or so they think.


Everyone is a photographer or an aspiring rapper.  Even the white kids.
 
2013-12-10 12:47:32 PM  
What?? *looks at article*

Oh, MY memory, not the phones memory.  That's OK then.
 
2013-12-10 12:49:31 PM  
FTFA iPhone and Galaxy snapping

Good thing I have a Motorola...

not really
 
2013-12-10 12:51:20 PM  

croesius: Saiga410: lordargent: No, I take pictures with a SLR.

[fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net image 850x206]

[fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net image 850x566]

[fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net image 850x169]

[scontent-b-lax.xx.fbcdn.net image 720x149]

[scontent-a-lax.xx.fbcdn.net image 720x185]


Is your only lense a wide angle?

Man, he must have been really freakin' close to those Blue Angels to get a shot like that from a wide angle lens.


Would you expect any different from a person that went to the danger zone just to take it's photo?
 
2013-12-10 12:52:39 PM  

imfallen_angel: But everyone's a photographer now...or so they think.


I like to think so.

lordargent: No, I take pictures with a SLR.


You're crazy. Everyone knows that the new Phone-that-wishes-it-were-a-camera gets you pro quality from the 35th row.

Check out these examples, that I totally took with my iPhone 3GS

i830.photobucket.com

i830.photobucket.com

i830.photobucket.com

/ok maybe that last one
//friend asked how big the new lens was
 
2013-12-10 12:59:36 PM  

The Googles Do Nothing: imfallen_angel: meh... someone that knows how to take pictures would observe to whole area, and visualize every possible angle, the approach, the lighting, the colours, the white balance, before the camera is even up.

But everyone's a photographer now...or so they think.

Everyone is a photographer or an aspiring rapper.  Even the white kids.


Let's not forget, everyone with a computer is a hacker, if you can boil water you're a chief, add oil to en engine then a mechanic, nail a picture up then an handyman (or woodworker), tighten a loose water hose then you're a plumber...etc.
 
2013-12-10 01:03:11 PM  
i478.photobucket.com
i478.photobucket.com i478.photobucket.com
i478.photobucket.com
/none taken with a phone
//recompression is a biatch.. I should redo them I see..
 
2013-12-10 01:08:50 PM  
Saiga410 : Is your only lense a wide angle?

I use the wide angle when shooting panoramas.

// some of the above photos are stitches from 4-5 shots @ about 55mm. I couldn't imagine taking a scene like that with say a 200mm.

Are macros narrow enough for you (these are from my "macro food" project).

scontent-a-lax.xx.fbcdn.net

scontent-a-lax.xx.fbcdn.net

scontent-b-lax.xx.fbcdn.net

scontent-a-lax.xx.fbcdn.net
Waffle / Corkscrew / Peeler / Fork
 
2013-12-10 01:36:04 PM  

imfallen_angel: The Googles Do Nothing: imfallen_angel: meh... someone that knows how to take pictures would observe to whole area, and visualize every possible angle, the approach, the lighting, the colours, the white balance, before the camera is even up.

But everyone's a photographer now...or so they think.

Everyone is a photographer or an aspiring rapper.  Even the white kids.

Let's not forget, everyone with a computer is a hacker, if you can boil water you're a chief, add oil to en engine then a mechanic, nail a picture up then an handyman (or woodworker), tighten a loose water hose then you're a plumber...etc.


an if'n ye feck ONE sheep...
 
2013-12-10 01:38:07 PM  

bikerbob59: What?? *looks at article*

Oh, MY memory, not the phones memory.  That's OK then.


Droid can remember it for you wholesale.
 
2013-12-10 01:49:34 PM  
 
2013-12-10 01:53:52 PM  

imfallen_angel: meh... someone that knows how to take pictures would observe to whole area, and visualize every possible angle, the approach, the lighting, the colours, the white balance, before the camera is even up.

But everyone's a photographer now...or so they think.


There is no smug like professional photographer smug. Any other type of artist will help and encourage people getting into the field. All I have ever seen from professional photographers is insults fired at anyone who buys a camera worth less than $2K, and snide comments without even seeing the photos. When I meet a photographer, I don't even mention I have a camera, because I don't want them immediately turning into an asshole.
 
2013-12-10 02:04:25 PM  

lordargent: No, I take pictures with a SLR.

[fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net image 850x206]

[fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net image 850x566]

[fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net image 850x169]

[scontent-b-lax.xx.fbcdn.net image 720x149]

[scontent-a-lax.xx.fbcdn.net image 720x185]


Came here to make a similar comment. I've rolled the counter over on my last 2 DSLRs.

But I did take this with an iPhone:
farm3.staticflickr.com

Notice the lensing in a couple of the frozen water drops (ice drops doesn't quite sound right).
 
2013-12-10 02:07:12 PM  

croesius: Saiga410: lordargent: No, I take pictures with a SLR.

[fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net image 850x206]

[fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net image 850x566]

[fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net image 850x169]

[scontent-b-lax.xx.fbcdn.net image 720x149]

[scontent-a-lax.xx.fbcdn.net image 720x185]


Is your only lense a wide angle?

Man, he must have been really freakin' close to those Blue Angels to get a shot like that from a wide angle lens.


it was about 3 meters and he was inverted.  If you look closely, there is a bird in the shot too

genuineindividual.com
 
2013-12-10 02:35:24 PM  

Dragonflew: Man forced to watch concert through his own eyes

[theshovelnews.files.wordpress.com image 850x586]


Meh who can see a farking thing at a concert anymore, with all the assholes holding up their stupid phones. Put your dam arm down and just enjoy the show you farking retards.
 
2013-12-10 02:36:50 PM  

Dragonflew: imfallen_angel: meh... someone that knows how to take pictures would observe to whole area, and visualize every possible angle, the approach, the lighting, the colours, the white balance, before the camera is even up.

But everyone's a photographer now...or so they think.

There is no smug like professional photographer smug. Any other type of artist will help and encourage people getting into the field. All I have ever seen from professional photographers is insults fired at anyone who buys a camera worth less than $2K, and snide comments without even seeing the photos. When I meet a photographer, I don't even mention I have a camera, because I don't want them immediately turning into an asshole.


Well it's not like their job is hard or even artistic. Hell my bot takes better pictures than 99% of professional photographers.
 
2013-12-10 03:25:49 PM  

lordargent: No, I take pictures with a SLR.

[fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net image 850x206]

[fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net image 850x566]

[fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net image 850x169]

[scontent-b-lax.xx.fbcdn.net image 720x149]

[scontent-a-lax.xx.fbcdn.net image 720x185]


Aruba?
 
2013-12-10 03:27:40 PM  
No.  the NSA does, though.
 
2013-12-10 03:55:12 PM  

Dragonflew: imfallen_angel: meh... someone that knows how to take pictures would observe to whole area, and visualize every possible angle, the approach, the lighting, the colours, the white balance, before the camera is even up.

But everyone's a photographer now...or so they think.

There is no smug like professional photographer smug. Any other type of artist will help and encourage people getting into the field. All I have ever seen from professional photographers is insults fired at anyone who buys a camera worth less than $2K, and snide comments without even seeing the photos. When I meet a photographer, I don't even mention I have a camera, because I don't want them immediately turning into an asshole.


True, in all the photographers I've worked/dealt with, only a couple were actually great people, the rest were absolute asses.

And this attitude I saw and dealt with from both the pros and the wannabees made me change my mind about pursuing it as a career.
 
2013-12-10 03:55:59 PM  

Cisco-Kid: Aruba?


Jamaica ooo I wanna take you
 
2013-12-10 04:03:50 PM  

Dragonflew: imfallen_angel: meh... someone that knows how to take pictures would observe to whole area, and visualize every possible angle, the approach, the lighting, the colours, the white balance, before the camera is even up.

But everyone's a photographer now...or so they think.

There is no smug like professional photographer smug. Any other type of artist will help and encourage people getting into the field. All I have ever seen from professional photographers is insults fired at anyone who buys a camera worth less than $2K, and snide comments without even seeing the photos. When I meet a photographer, I don't even mention I have a camera, because I don't want them immediately turning into an asshole.


Well, the problem there is that every camera (and especially every lens that could go on that camera) has limitations. The more things your camera can do (and the price will rise accordingly) the more different kinds of shots you can get.

You can make beautiful photographs with a cheap camera. You can take bad pictures with an expensive camera. The point is that although you may have an artist's eye, if you are sufficiently serious about photography, then at some point you will bump up against the limitations of your tool. The poorer quality the tool is, the sooner that will happen.

I like to take photos of my kids playing sports. With the soccer player, it doesn't take much of a camera to get those shots and a zoom lens is all that's needed.

My other kid plays volleyball and basketball. Getting decent photos of that obligated me to purchase an SLR and a reasonably fast lens, because it is too dark in a gym to get a properly exposed photo with anything else. Not many integrated-lens cameras offer f/1.8. And it's not much of an SLR - a used Nikon D40 and a 50/1.8 lens. With this setup I can get pretty good action-freezing photos; but I do want a body with more megapixels and high ISO capabilities, because the 50mm lens is so short that action that isn't happening right in front of me has to be cropped down (sometimes by a lot) and then the graininess of ISO 1600 becomes pretty obvious. I can't afford an 85mm lens right now, let alone the f2.8 zooms that are the standard for sports photography (i.e. what grinding_journalist showed us upthread.)
 
Ant
2013-12-10 05:15:31 PM  
grinding_journalist:
img.fark.net
/ok maybe that last one
//friend asked how big the new lens was


WANT!!! Those are farking expensive!
 
2013-12-10 05:39:27 PM  

lordargent: No, I take pictures with a SLR.

[fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net image 850x206]

[fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net image 850x566]

[fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net image 850x169]

[scontent-b-lax.xx.fbcdn.net image 720x149]

[scontent-a-lax.xx.fbcdn.net image 720x185]


purplegaming.slashmeow.com
 
2013-12-10 05:43:35 PM  
You're gonna pay extra for one hour photo?  What, you forgot already?
 
2013-12-10 05:59:10 PM  
Morchella: Came here to make a similar comment. I've rolled the counter over on my last 2 DSLRs.

I ran low on disk space first (had a 2 disk mirror).

Now I'm getting a 2 disk NAS box and putting two 3TB drives in it (mirrored). So I can get out and start shooting a lot.

// Might even upgrade my camera now that I will have more space for RAWs.

Cisco-Kid : Aruba?

St Thomas
San Diego
Lake Havasu
Las Vegas
Aruba

pdieten: You can make beautiful photographs with a cheap camera

I also carry a point and shoot, for times when I want a shot, but the SLR is too cumbersome to set it up (or I have the wrong lens on the SLR).

This is one of my favorite non-slr shots (from a hot air balooning outing in Sedona AZ).

fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net
 
2013-12-10 06:12:25 PM  
No, no I don't. I also don't allow a lot of pictures of me to be taken.
 
2013-12-10 06:33:06 PM  
No. But then again, I don't have a camera phone.
 
2013-12-10 06:40:11 PM  

albert71292: No. But then again, I don't have a camera phone.


lol
 
2013-12-10 07:01:16 PM  

SearchN: No, no I don't. I also don't allow a lot of pictures of me to be taken.


Same. I hate being on the wrong side of a camera.
 
2013-12-10 07:45:24 PM  
I've said it before and I'll say it again.  You can go beach, park, mountains, zoo, party, etc and take pictures or you can go to the beach, park, mountains, zoo, party, etc and enjoy going the beach, park, mountains, zoo, party, etc but you can't do both.
 
2013-12-10 09:46:46 PM  

relaxitsjustme: I've said it before and I'll say it again.  You can go beach, park, mountains, zoo, party, etc and take pictures or you can go to the beach, park, mountains, zoo, party, etc and enjoy going the beach, park, mountains, zoo, party, etc but you can't do both.


Never heard that argument before. And not that you care, but I strongly disagree.

Cheers.
 
2013-12-10 10:37:06 PM  

lordargent: Morchella: Came here to make a similar comment. I've rolled the counter over on my last 2 DSLRs.

I ran low on disk space first (had a 2 disk mirror).

Now I'm getting a 2 disk NAS box and putting two 3TB drives in it (mirrored). So I can get out and start shooting a lot.

// Might even upgrade my camera now that I will have more space for RAWs.

Cisco-Kid : Aruba?

St Thomas
San Diego
Lake Havasu
Las Vegas
Aruba

pdieten: You can make beautiful photographs with a cheap camera

I also carry a point and shoot, for times when I want a shot, but the SLR is too cumbersome to set it up (or I have the wrong lens on the SLR).

This is one of my favorite non-slr shots (from a hot air balooning outing in Sedona AZ).

[fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net image 850x637]


One thing I'll say... until I took a hot air balloon ride, I never appreciated hanging out the side of a gondola on absolute, dead silence and peace & quiet a mile up in the air.

I've flown low and fast in steel, and 'chuting is up next....but the blissful, almost zen quiet off a gondola as the sun rises is ...well, unequaled.
 
2013-12-10 10:44:50 PM  

John Buck 41: relaxitsjustme: I've said it before and I'll say it again.  You can go beach, park, mountains, zoo, party, etc and take pictures or you can go to the beach, park, mountains, zoo, party, etc and enjoy going the beach, park, mountains, zoo, party, etc but you can't do both.

Never heard that argument before. And not that you care, but I strongly disagree.

Cheers.



You're certainly free to disagree but that's been my experience. You can either run around the party with a drink in your hand and shoot the shait with you friends or you can skip the small talk and wander around the party with a DSLR in your hands looking for angles, lighting and shots. In the case of landscape throw on a lens bag and tripod too.
You can go to the beach and go swimming and being buried up to your ass in sand or you can take photos. Both are enjoyable but you end up choosing one or the other. Unless your idea of photography is Instagram selfies, then knock yourself out.
 
2013-12-11 12:14:10 AM  

relaxitsjustme: John Buck 41: relaxitsjustme: I've said it before and I'll say it again.  You can go beach, park, mountains, zoo, party, etc and take pictures or you can go to the beach, park, mountains, zoo, party, etc and enjoy going the beach, park, mountains, zoo, party, etc but you can't do both.

Never heard that argument before. And not that you care, but I strongly disagree.

Cheers.


You're certainly free to disagree but that's been my experience. You can either run around the party with a drink in your hand and shoot the shait with you friends or you can skip the small talk and wander around the party with a DSLR in your hands looking for angles, lighting and shots. In the case of landscape throw on a lens bag and tripod too.
You can go to the beach and go swimming and being buried up to your ass in sand or you can take photos. Both are enjoyable but you end up choosing one or the other. Unless your idea of photography is Instagram selfies, then knock yourself out.


The thing is... if you are a decent photographer, you can easily prepare your camera for the environment that you're in ahead of time, and simply point and shoot and get excellent pictures.

If you're going around looking for angles, lighting and shots, then you are a clueless moron that should not have a camera in your hands.

And that's how I know when there's a wannabee around, and he'll probably be the most annoying idiot around.
 
2013-12-11 12:36:28 AM  

imfallen_angel: relaxitsjustme: John Buck 41: relaxitsjustme: I've said it before and I'll say it again.  You can go beach, park, mountains, zoo, party, etc and take pictures or you can go to the beach, park, mountains, zoo, party, etc and enjoy going the beach, park, mountains, zoo, party, etc but you can't do both.

Never heard that argument before. And not that you care, but I strongly disagree.

Cheers.


You're certainly free to disagree but that's been my experience. You can either run around the party with a drink in your hand and shoot the shait with you friends or you can skip the small talk and wander around the party with a DSLR in your hands looking for angles, lighting and shots. In the case of landscape throw on a lens bag and tripod too.
You can go to the beach and go swimming and being buried up to your ass in sand or you can take photos. Both are enjoyable but you end up choosing one or the other. Unless your idea of photography is Instagram selfies, then knock yourself out.

The thing is... if you are a decent photographer, you can easily prepare your camera for the environment that you're in ahead of time, and simply point and shoot and get excellent pictures.

If you're going around looking for angles, lighting and shots, then you are a clueless moron that should not have a camera in your hands.

And that's how I know when there's a wannabee around, and he'll probably be the most annoying idiot around.


Dude really?  If you don't take into account angles, lighting, background you're going to get POS pictures that your mom could have taken.

/you might be right about the wannabee part, because you're an annoying idiot.
 
2013-12-11 01:20:04 AM  

Ant: grinding_journalist:
[img.fark.net image 414x310]
/ok maybe that last one
//friend asked how big the new lens was

WANT!!! Those are farking expensive!


Not really.

i00.i.aliimg.com

Your chinatown should have them.
 
2013-12-11 01:28:25 AM  
I don't like those much. Everything in them always looks brownish and muddy.
 
2013-12-11 03:54:59 AM  
imfallen_angel:
If you're going around looking for angles, lighting and shots, then you are a clueless moron that should not have a camera in your hands.

And that's how I know when there's a wannabee around, and he'll probably be the most annoying idiot around.


Is this the best photography troll I have ever seen?
 
2013-12-11 09:03:22 AM  

Ant: WANT!!! Those are farking expensive!


Don't I know it. And my wife knows it. And my bank knows it, since they technically own it.

/I'd rather use it while I pay for it even if it costs me a bit extra
//and they STILL won't let me shoot at Indy or Texas
///anyone have any contacts in motorsports?
 
2013-12-11 09:38:53 AM  

relaxitsjustme: Dude really? If you don't take into account angles, lighting, background you're going to get POS pictures that your mom could have taken.

/you might be right about the wannabee part, because you're an annoying idiot.


Dragonflew: Is this the best photography troll I have ever seen?


You know how I know that you are clueless wannabees?

Take notes and troll right back if you need to do a pissing content


a) If you can't adjust a camera on manual faster than the auto mode(s), you're not a photographer.

b) For the "party/activity" scenario:

Someone with a clue, I repeat, will have checked the place, the environment ahead of time, at arrival, made the adjustments to the camera already, and won't be "looking" for angles and lighting, he'll already know them and will just need to get in position according to the subject, make any minor adjustments required and take the shot quickly and move on.
i478.photobucket.com

The idiots that walk around, doing the big "artistic" stance and needing to do a dozen adjustments, place people, and need to set the shot up to create a false "candid" moment shouldn't be allowed a camera so to claim that they are photographers, they are cheap amateurs that are following a dorky manual for the clueless.
i478.photobucket.com

If you can't simply know what a good shot is without all the wannabe crap, you're not a photographer. This includes taking dozens of pictures (including having the camera set at multiple FPS) in the hope that one will be good.

If your taking pictures makes you feel important instead of being something you enjoy, you aren't a photographer.

If you need more than a 1-2 seconds to take the picture, you aren't a photographer.
i478.photobucket.com


If you create a disturbance and can't be "invisible, move in, take your shot, and move to the next location quickly, you aren't a photographer

i478.photobucket.com

c) For the sport/exterior events/wildlife:

If you aren't able to take a shot in less than a second, as these need to be done very fast, you aren't a photographer

i478.photobucket.com

If you don't know what lens to use, you aren't a photographer.

If you aren't able to get in the best location for the shots, you aren't a photographer
i478.photobucket.com


d) Macro
i478.photobucket.com

inside setup: If you haven't prepared a proper environment or see one just by looking, you aren't a photographer

i478.photobucket.com

outside setup: if you don't know what time of the day you should go out for the sun to be at the best angle for the shots you're do doing, you aren't a photographer

i478.photobucket.com


If you're not able to evaluate the conditions and make corrections to the settings on the fly, you aren't a photographer

If you don't have patience, you aren't a photographer

e) landscape
i478.photobucket.com


If you assume that any time of the day, this can be done, you aren't a photographer

i478.photobucket.com

If you haven't scouted ahead, you aren't a photographer

And if you can't see the beauty in the most mundane things and capture it, you aren't a photographer

i478.photobucket.com

/yes, these are all my pictures
//yes the compression on some needs to be redone.
 
2013-12-11 09:54:21 AM  
A few more for god measure..
i478.photobucket.com

i478.photobucket.com
i478.photobucket.com


And for all my pictures, I've used many different type of cameras, from DSLR, to high-end (pre-DSLR) digital cameras, to film ones, etc.

The camera accounts for the quality of the film, sensor, and lens, the rest in the person behind it, and a good photographer (or someone with skills and a good eye) is able to manage amazing images from just about any camera, even crappy ones.

The reverse isn't true... the best (or most expensive) camera in the world in the hands of a wannabee, will produce wannabee pictures.  "Best" scenario will be that the camera's system will be so good that it will compensate for the person's lacking... but he'll never admit to it (and always shot on the automatic mode(s)).
 
2013-12-11 10:00:44 AM  
Maybe I can provide the next topic for their science grant quest: Drive a passenger (sitting in the front seat) in a car to a location they've not been to before. Discover they don't remember the way very well. Next, have them drive to a location they've never been to before, discover they remember the path better because they drove it.

Conclusion: A person will remember more when they are forced to concentrate on the topic.

Wait: Isn't that the same conclusion as this study? You mean, it has little to do with technology of your phone, but merely the human condition?

Wow, I think we've all learned something here today.
 
2013-12-11 10:35:22 AM  

imfallen_angel: relaxitsjustme: Dude really? If you don't take into account angles, lighting, background you're going to get POS pictures that your mom could have taken.

/you might be right about the wannabee part, because you're an annoying idiot.

Dragonflew: Is this the best photography troll I have ever seen?

You know how I know that you are clueless wannabees?

Take notes and troll right back if you need to do a pissing content


a) If you can't adjust a camera on manual faster than the auto mode(s), you're not a photographer.

b) For the "party/activity" scenario:

Someone with a clue, I repeat, will have checked the place, the environment ahead of time, at arrival, made the adjustments to the camera already, and won't be "looking" for angles and lighting, he'll already know them and will just need to get in position according to the subject, make any minor adjustments required and take the shot quickly and move on.
[i478.photobucket.com image 850x637]


Remember upthread when I said that there is no smug like pro photographer smug? I was referring to your comments. Add photography to the long list of subjects you are a total farking asshole about.
 
2013-12-11 11:03:33 AM  

Dragonflew: Remember upthread when I said that there is no smug like pro photographer smug? I was referring to your comments. Add photography to the long list of subjects you are a total farking asshole about.


Plus he spells "wannabe" wrong.
 
2013-12-11 11:16:36 AM  

Dragonflew: Remember upthread when I said that there is no smug like pro photographer smug? I was referring to your comments. Add photography to the long list of subjects you are a total farking asshole about.


awwww... I'm so glad to have pissed in your cereal then.

What's funny is that what my post(s) are about, is the fact that many wannabees will be asshats that claim to be photographers while being clueless, as they take nothing but snapshots (letting the automated settings of the camera do everything) and think that makes them skilled.

So it's very ironic that you're just too stupid to understand that.

My points are that if you are so farking clueless about photography, but still pursue a career in it, act like an asshat about it, you shouldn't bother.

And the double irony is that you wine :

"There is no smug like professional photographer smug. Any other type of artist will help and encourage people getting into the field. All I have ever seen from professional photographers is insults fired at anyone who buys a camera worth less than $2K, and snide comments without even seeing the photos. When I meet a photographer, I don't even mention I have a camera, because I don't want them immediately turning into an asshole. "

then you call me a troll... when I state that the camera only matters to an extent, and that someone with skills, will simply have skills and take great pictures

Maybe stating that I used to teach photography (and darkroom) in my younger days, and still take my time to help newcomers into the "art" of photography, regardless of their equipment might help you get my point(s), which are: get a clue, look around, get to know your camera, the environment, go with your guts, have fun, and do more than just snapshots, learn to use the manual setting, and understand why you need to know how to use it.  And: practice, practice and more practice until it's second nature to not even have to wonder about your aperture, speed, ISO, etc... you just set them as if the camera is an extension of yourself.

If you can just be somewhere and instinctively know what stop, speed and ISO to use, visualize the framing of the image before you even bring the camera up to your eye, then odds are, the pictures you'll take will be great.

P.S.: I've never owned/bough a camera that was over 1K.. heck, my present D-SLR was around the 500$ range, I don't need the fancy crap that the higher end provides, (but I would love to eventually get a full frame sensor model) I didn't have it with my 35mm, as I use manual for just about everything, and have invested more into my lens and other accessories, which I've never really could afford a fortune anyways.

The important things that matters the most for any digital camera is : quality of the sensor (and the shutter), ability to be fully manual, and sensitivity to light (high ISO).

With film cameras, it used to be: the mechanics of the camera... as the film's quality dealt with the image quality and sensitivity to light.

(and of course, quality lens for any camera)

Anyways, guess you feel threatened somehow... maybe these "pros" that you whined about turn into assholes not because you have a camera, but because you're a dumbass, so continue with the childish attacks.
 
2013-12-11 11:20:47 AM  

Quantum Apostrophe: Dragonflew: Remember upthread when I said that there is no smug like pro photographer smug? I was referring to your comments. Add photography to the long list of subjects you are a total farking asshole about.

Plus he spells "wannabe" wrong.


The hell you say... might as well get the torches and pitchforks...
 
2013-12-11 11:34:36 AM  

Dragonflew: There is no smug like professional photographer smug. Any other type of artist will help and encourage people getting into the field. All I have ever seen from professional photographers is insults fired at anyone who buys a camera worth less than $2K,


...check!

and snide comments without even seeing the photos.

...check!

When I meet a photographer, I don't even mention I have a camera, because I don't want them immediately turning into an asshole.

...aaaand check.

I'm not threatened at all. I own a camera and enjoy taking pictures from time to time., NOWHERE did I say I was any good. I think pro photographers are the ones who feel threatened, as even a blind person can get a great shot with today's cameras, and many of their "skills" are becoming obsolete.
 
2013-12-11 11:45:59 AM  

imfallen_angel: Quantum Apostrophe: Dragonflew: Remember upthread when I said that there is no smug like pro photographer smug? I was referring to your comments. Add photography to the long list of subjects you are a total farking asshole about.

Plus he spells "wannabe" wrong.

The hell you say... might as well get the torches and pitchforks...


...and a beekeeper suit.
 
2013-12-11 12:14:32 PM  

imfallen_angel: Dragonflew: Remember upthread when I said that there is no smug like pro photographer smug? I was referring to your comments. Add photography to the long list of subjects you are a total farking asshole about.

awwww... I'm so glad to have pissed in your cereal then.

What's funny is that what my post(s) are about, is the fact that many wannabees will be asshats that claim to be photographers while being clueless, as they take nothing but snapshots (letting the automated settings of the camera do everything) and think that makes them skilled.

So it's very ironic that you're just too stupid to understand that.

My points are that if you are so farking clueless about photography, but still pursue a career in it, act like an asshat about it, you shouldn't bother.

And the double irony is that you wine :

"There is no smug like professional photographer smug. Any other type of artist will help and encourage people getting into the field. All I have ever seen from professional photographers is insults fired at anyone who buys a camera worth less than $2K, and snide comments without even seeing the photos. When I meet a photographer, I don't even mention I have a camera, because I don't want them immediately turning into an asshole. "

then you call me a troll... when I state that the camera only matters to an extent, and that someone with skills, will simply have skills and take great pictures

Maybe stating that I used to teach photography (and darkroom) in my younger days, and still take my time to help newcomers into the "art" of photography, regardless of their equipment might help you get my point(s), which are: get a clue, look around, get to know your camera, the environment, go with your guts, have fun, and do more than just snapshots, learn to use the manual setting, and understand why you need to know how to use it.  And: practice, practice and more practice until it's second nature to not even have to wonder about your aperture, speed, ISO, etc... you just se ...


Good god dude back of the Ritalin or something, you've gone full-douche.
 
2013-12-11 12:22:08 PM  

Dragonflew: as even a blind person can get a great shot with today's cameras, and many of their "skills" are becoming obsolete.


hmm.. you need to look at what some "young kids" are doing lately.. and it's nowhere close to being due to automated cameras, just imagination, skills and a passion for it.

Fark gets links for these once in a while.. I should have saved a few... the last one in particular that I remember. the girl took amazing images in the forest... no photoshops, just amazing images that took a lot of work.  I really wish I had bookmarked her site.
 
2013-12-11 12:27:17 PM  

Barfmaker: Good god dude back of the Ritalin or something, you've gone full-douche.


Let's see, I'm bringing up points about photography, but yet you take the time to post an insult...nothing worth-while..

Nice...
 
2013-12-11 01:00:01 PM  
Isn't this the same thing they said about Google 10 years ago?
 
2013-12-11 01:22:06 PM  

Dragonflew: imfallen_angel: relaxitsjustme: Dude really? If you don't take into account angles, lighting, background you're going to get POS pictures that your mom could have taken.

/you might be right about the wannabee part, because you're an annoying idiot.

Dragonflew: Is this the best photography troll I have ever seen?


Remember upthread when I said that there is no smug like pro photographer smug? I was referring to your comments. Add photography to the long list of subjects you are a total farking asshole about.


Thanks for picking the phrase I now have imfallen_angel tagged with.  Internetfistbump.jpg
 
2013-12-11 03:50:19 PM  

imfallen_angel: relaxitsjustme: Dude really? If you don't take into account angles, lighting, background you're going to get POS pictures that your mom could have taken.

/you might be right about the wannabee part, because you're an annoying idiot.

Dragonflew: Is this the best photography troll I have ever seen?

You know how I know that you are clueless wannabees?

Take notes and troll right back if you need to do a pissing content


a) If you can't adjust a camera on manual faster than the auto mode(s), you're not a photographer.

b) For the "party/activity" scenario:

Someone with a clue, I repeat, will have checked the place, the environment ahead of time, at arrival, made the adjustments to the camera already, and won't be "looking" for angles and lighting, he'll already know them and will just need to get in position according to the subject, make any minor adjustments required and take the shot quickly and move on.


The idiots that walk around, doing the big "artistic" stance and needing to do a dozen adjustments, place people, and need to set the shot up to create a false "candid" moment shouldn't be allowed a camera so to claim that they are photographers, they are cheap amateurs that are following a dorky manual for the clueless.


If you can't simply know what a good shot is without all the wannabe crap, you're not a photographer. This includes taking dozens of pictures (including having the camera set at multiple FPS) in the hope that one will be good.

If your taking pictures makes you feel important instead of being something you enjoy, you aren't a photographer.

If you need more than a 1-2 seconds to take the picture, you aren't a photographer.

If you create a disturbance and can't be "invisible, move in, take your shot, and move to the next location quickly, you aren't a photographer

c) For the sport/exterior events/wildlife:

If you aren't able to take a shot in less than a second, as these need to be done very fast, you aren't a photographer

If you don't know what lens to use, you aren't a photographer.

If you aren't able to get in the best location for the shots, you aren't a photographer

d) Macro


inside setup: If you haven't prepared a proper environment or see one just by looking, you aren't a photographer

outside setup: if you don't know what time of the day you should go out for the sun to be at the best angle for the shots you're do doing, you aren't a photographer

If you're not able to evaluate the conditions and make corrections to the settings on the fly, you aren't a photographer

If you don't have patience, you aren't a photographer

e) landscape

If you assume that any time of the day, this can be done, you aren't a photographer

If you haven't scouted ahead, you aren't a photographer

And if you can't see the beauty in the most mundane things and capture it, you aren't a photographer

/yes, these are all my pictures
//yes the compression on some needs to be redone.


...but I can be a True Scotsman on Fark.
 
2013-12-11 04:08:22 PM  

Fano: ...but I can be a True Scotsman on Fark.


Considering that people take things way too seriously on Fark and get their panties in such a knot... I find it funny how some assume so much with so little.

This thread is a funny example of this, which I had fun with.
 
2013-12-11 06:33:40 PM  
P.S. Photography is like Karaoke... everyone can do it, doesn't mean you can sing.
 
2013-12-11 08:45:40 PM  
I'm not going to join the current pissing match, but just want to reiterate that one CAN go to the beach, a party, etc., enjoy themselves, and take the occasional snapshot. If you CAN'T do that you're pretty farking pathetic.
 
Displayed 72 of 72 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report