# Photo Cliches you Love to Hate



## Peeb

There must be dozens of them, but I'll start:

B/W photos with selective colorization of one part only.  I've done this a million times (once recently), but I cringe every time I see a photo by someone else like this.

What do you look at and say "Oh no, not again!"???


----------



## snowbear

Here's three pages worth - take your pick.
http://www.thephotoforum.com/search/2487486/?q=Cliche&o=date&c[title_only]

Add "Fire Hydrants" to the list.  They seem to be a favorite for those taking photo classes when you get the "multiple views of a single object" assignment.


----------



## rexbobcat

Matte blacks in post-processing. If you think it looks anything like film then you need to stop looking at bad scans.


----------



## Designer

High-school kids on railroad tracks.

Any model in a vacant building.

Wedding dress on a hanger.

Landscape with no particular subject.

"Which do you prefer; color or B&W?"

"Thoughts?"

Seriously underexposed.

(give me time, I'm sure I will come up with more)


----------



## snowbear

Oh, I'll add: fake (pp) vignette, sepia conversion, fake vignette on sepia conversion, railroad track (usually senior or engagement) shots and "heart hands."

overcooked hdr, but that's a whole (or hole) category by itself.


----------



## Peeb

Good stuff.

Am I the only fool who occasionally can't resist the cliche shot, KNOWING that it's lame, but still loving it?

"Hello, I'm Peeb, and a cliche-a-holic".


----------



## snowbear

In being fully open and honest, I hereby fully disclose that I have used three of the aforementioned subjects and/or techniques, that did not get trash canned, in my attempts at photography: selective coloring, fire hydrants, and sepia conversion.

I furthermore disclose that I did use each of those three subjects and/or techniques but one time, and the selective coloring was non-digital and involved artist's oil paints.


----------



## Derrel

From Designer:
Wedding dress on a hanger.
"Which do you prefer; color or B&W?"
"Thoughts?"

These are Gold Medal winning, Silver Medal winning, and Bronze Medal winning competitors! Just yesterday, I saw a post, "Color or B/W-so hard to decide," listed by the photographer. She had an average color outdoor nude, and a reallllllly crappy, God-awful B&W version of the same image. Both were poor.

QWedding dress on a hanger is really a cliche. So hackneyed and so pathetically tired. Retail photography has a lot of cliches and tropes that people "expect", and let's face it, many brides and grooms are 20-somethings with very limited visual taste. They want what their young friends want.


----------



## Designer

Peeb said:


> Am I the only fool who occasionally can't resist the cliche shot, KNOWING that it's lame, but still loving it?


Actually, you can really make some art if you find a way to do a cliche shot in a way that is totally unexpected and done better than any of the standard cliche shots.

O.K., now this is a lame example, but a while back a wedding photographer (sorry I forgot your name just now) posted a pair of shots with the wedding party on a railroad, and followed that with a shot of the wedding party running off in terror ahead of an approaching train.  

Now I would not recommend using a real railroad for this kind of shot, but this was a hobby railroad, so I could tell it was staged in fun and relative safety.  

I liked that pair of shots well enough to nominate the pair for Photo Of The Month.

Cliche done well.


----------



## Peeb

Designer said:


> High-school kids on railroad tracks.
> Any model in a vacant building.
> Wedding dress on a hanger.
> Landscape with no particular subject.  *GUILTY*
> "Which do you prefer; color or B&W?"  *GULITY*
> "Thoughts?"  *GUILTY*
> Seriously underexposed.  *GULITY*
> (give me time, I'm sure I will come up with more)



I'm guilty of the above- even tho I'm well aware of the cliche and don't often enjoy other's doing these.

Except for the 'boring landscapes'.  I always love those. Perhaps I'm easily amused....


----------



## jsecordphoto

Milky Way self portrait with flashlight beam up at the sky. Please.stop.


----------



## 480sparky

Any selfie.  Especially taken in the bathroom mirror with a cell phone.


----------



## snowbear

OK,  Now I want to make a sepia-toned selectively colored heart hand shot, from a vacant building with a wedding dress on a hanger off to the side, with the milky way in the background an lit by flashlight.
And to make @sm4him happy, I'm going to call it "Space" and enter it into the monthly challenge.


----------



## limr

Smoooooooth water.


----------



## snowbear

limr said:


> Smoooooooth water.


I like smooth water, especially when it's in smooth Scotch.


----------



## vfotog

while things can be overdone, they often become that way because there is something appealing about them. Before digital, coloring prints was very popular and it was fun. I've done selective coloring with oils, pencils and markers. Sepia can be effective too. I'd hate to see all the techniques of the past become unfashionable just because they are "old".


----------



## Derrel

limr said:
			
		

> Smoooooooth water.



OMG, spot-on Leonore! I always think to myself, in a snarky inner voice, almost every time I see yet another Big Stopper shot (10-stop neutral density filter, for those who have been living in a cave since the web site _500px_ came onto the interwebs...), that the advertising for them ought to have a slogan, like: "*The Big Stopper--creativity you can just thread on!*" Available in all sizes from 37.5mm to 122mm filter threads! Creativity--all it takes is Time! The more time, the more creativity! Buy The Big Stopper today!


----------



## medic2230

Derrel said:


> limr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Smoooooooth water.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OMG, spot-on Leonore! I always think to myself, in a snarky inner voice, almost every time I see yet another Big Stopper shot (10-stop neutral density filter, for those who have been living in a cave since the web site _500px_ came onto the interwebs...), that the advertising for them ought to have a slogan, like: "*The Big Stopper--creativity you can just thread on!*" Available in all sizes from 37.5mm to 122mm filter threads! Creativity--all it takes is Time! The more time, the more creativity! Buy The Big Stopper today!
Click to expand...


Well I'm just off to the B&H website to get one right now. I want to be all kinds of creative. With all that time on my hands while being creative I can surf TPF or have a beer or something.


----------



## Vtec44

Designer said:


> Wedding dress on a hanger.



I'm guilty of this almost every weekend.  I love it!


----------



## rexbobcat

vfotog said:


> while things can be overdone, they often become that way because there is something appealing about them. Before digital, coloring prints was very popular and it was fun. I've done selective coloring with oils, pencils and markers. Sepia can be effective too. I'd hate to see all the techniques of the past become unfashionable just because they are "old".



The issue is that the appealing photos within the cliche (before it became a cliche) were generally produced by professionals and other highly skilled individuals. Like HDR. Everybody saw these spectacular hyper-real HDR images on blogs and decided they wanted to create the same things. However, their lack of skill combined with their lack of visual acuity meant that the web became inundated with "bad" HDR images.

As a result, everybody came to expect the "bad" HDR any time anyone brought the technique up.

Some cliches are nice when done well, generally in such a way that the photo itself is so good that you almost don't even recognize it as a cliche.

Bad cliched photos are derivative or appropriated. Good cliched photos are, in my eyes, more of a tribute to the original spirit of the cliche; what made it appealing in the first place.


----------



## KenC

An image in which someone who thinks ROT has to be followed takes the one dominant element in the frame (sometimes the only element) and places it 1/3 of the way from one side, thereby creating an unbalanced image that makes no sense.


----------



## robbins.photo

KenC said:


> An image in which someone who thinks ROT has to be followed takes the one dominant element in the frame (sometimes the only element) and places it 1/3 of the way from one side, thereby creating an unbalanced image that makes no sense.



So what we really need is a contest to see who can combine the most cliches in one photograph.. lol


----------



## KenC

robbins.photo said:


> KenC said:
> 
> 
> 
> An image in which someone who thinks ROT has to be followed takes the one dominant element in the frame (sometimes the only element) and places it 1/3 of the way from one side, thereby creating an unbalanced image that makes no sense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So what we really need is a contest to see who can combine the most cliches in one photograph.. lol
Click to expand...


Good idea, but I think it would hurt too much to try it.


----------



## pixmedic

I think photos with people In them are totally cliche now.


----------



## ronlane

480sparky said:


> Any selfie.  Especially taken in the bathroom mirror with a cell phone.



Sparky, It's not in a bathroom mirror or taken with a cell phone. But it's a selfie and b&w, lol.


----------



## gsgary

Wooden letter blocks on a baby bump, mums making a heart shape with their index fingers and thumbs against baby bump, people asking how to shoot a bokeh shot the list is endless


----------



## Designer

Oh, I am reminded of another one; (although not restricted to photography) that HUGE headdress on a baby girl.  Big as her head in some cases.


----------



## Vtec44

KenC said:


> An image in which someone who thinks ROT has to be followed takes the one dominant element in the frame (sometimes the only element) and places it 1/3 of the way from one side, thereby creating an unbalanced image that makes no sense.



As opposed to placing it dead center?


----------



## JacaRanda

Somewhat a reverse........mentioning that overcooked HDR is "Not My Taste".  Ughhhh  Actually, mentioning anything is "Not My Taste" or "Not My Thing".


----------



## robbins.photo

JacaRanda said:


> Somewhat a reverse........mentioning that overcooked HDR is "Not My Taste".  Ughhhh  Actually, mentioning anything is "Not My Taste" or "Not My Thing".



So if I were to mention that this post is really "Not my cup of tea"...  lol


----------



## JacaRanda

robbins.photo said:


> JacaRanda said:
> 
> 
> 
> Somewhat a reverse........mentioning that overcooked HDR is "Not My Taste".  Ughhhh  Actually, mentioning anything is "Not My Taste" or "Not My Thing".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So if I were to mention that this post is really "Not my cup of tea"...  lol
Click to expand...

 
Well if it's tea, that's a whole different thing.  Pinky finger up or down?


----------



## Derrel

How about those simply adooooooooorable photos that have a pretty heart shape, made by two lovely hands, formed into a heart shaped hand thingie that looks like a paper cutout shaped heart--but you know, it's made by human hands! Soooo pretty!!!


----------



## rexbobcat

This isn't really an image cliche, but photographers who describe themselves in their website bio's (and sometimes in real life *cringe*) as "creative photographers.

Like, I would hope you were creative, considering that photography is a...creative profession...


----------



## Vtec44

rexbobcat said:


> This isn't really an image cliche, but photographers who describe themselves in their website bio's (and sometimes in real life *cringe*) as "creative photographers.



I see that you have read my about page...


----------



## KenC

Vtec44 said:


> KenC said:
> 
> 
> 
> An image in which someone who thinks ROT has to be followed takes the one dominant element in the frame (sometimes the only element) and places it 1/3 of the way from one side, thereby creating an unbalanced image that makes no sense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As opposed to placing it dead center?
Click to expand...


Yep.  The Mona Lisa is centered - check it out.


----------



## robbins.photo

JacaRanda said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JacaRanda said:
> 
> 
> 
> Somewhat a reverse........mentioning that overcooked HDR is "Not My Taste".  Ughhhh  Actually, mentioning anything is "Not My Taste" or "Not My Thing".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So if I were to mention that this post is really "Not my cup of tea"...  lol
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well if it's tea, that's a whole different thing.  Pinky finger up or down?
Click to expand...


I'm really not allowed to discuss what I do with my pinky finger in polite company.  But since it's you folks.. lol


----------



## robbins.photo

KenC said:


> Vtec44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KenC said:
> 
> 
> 
> An image in which someone who thinks ROT has to be followed takes the one dominant element in the frame (sometimes the only element) and places it 1/3 of the way from one side, thereby creating an unbalanced image that makes no sense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As opposed to placing it dead center?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep.  The Mona Lisa is centered - check it out.
Click to expand...


True, but I checked Leonardo's website and in his about page it does not specify he is a "creative painter".  So I think he gets a pass.


----------



## unpopular

Artsy hands. it's cool when you're a second year college student, but after that there's just no excuse.

Poverty porn. it's not only tasteless, it's abusive.


----------



## unpopular

oh. and ducks.


----------



## KenC

robbins.photo said:


> KenC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vtec44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KenC said:
> 
> 
> 
> An image in which someone who thinks ROT has to be followed takes the one dominant element in the frame (sometimes the only element) and places it 1/3 of the way from one side, thereby creating an unbalanced image that makes no sense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As opposed to placing it dead center?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep.  The Mona Lisa is centered - check it out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> True, but I checked Leonardo's website and in his about page it does not specify he is a "creative painter".  So I think he gets a pass.
Click to expand...


I think he's just trying not to draw attention to himself so he can go on inventing things.


----------



## unpopular

old, framed photos pinned up on clothes lines.

wtf is up with this?


----------



## unpopular

"art nudes" in general.


----------



## Vtec44

KenC said:


> Vtec44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KenC said:
> 
> 
> 
> An image in which someone who thinks ROT has to be followed takes the one dominant element in the frame (sometimes the only element) and places it 1/3 of the way from one side, thereby creating an unbalanced image that makes no sense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As opposed to placing it dead center?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep.  The Mona Lisa is centered - check it out.
Click to expand...


You can get away with it if your name is Leonardo da Vinci and applying the Golden Ratio (which is not dead center).


----------



## robbins.photo

KenC said:


> I think he's just trying not to draw attention to himself so he can go on inventing things.



Could be.  That helicopter deal was pretty neat.


----------



## unpopular

Enough about Leonardo DiCaprio. No amount of Basketball Diaries or What's Eating Gilbert Grape will forgive working with James Cameron.


----------



## SCraig

People who call their snapshots "My Work" to give the impression they put a lot of effort into it.


----------



## gsgary

Zoo photos posted in Wildlife,  that's a big one of my hates


----------



## robbins.photo

unpopular said:


> Enough about Leonardo DiCaprio. No amount of Basketball Diaries or What's Eating Gilbert Grape will forgive working with James Cameron.



But isn't working with James Cameron in and of itself a cliche?

Wow.. somebody queue Mufassa, time for that whole Circle of Life number..   lol


----------



## robbins.photo

gsgary said:


> Zoo photos posted in Wildlife,  that's a big one of my hates



Rotfl.. well I'll be sure to dedicate my next posting to you.


----------



## JacaRanda

gsgary said:


> Zoo photos posted in Wildlife,  that's a big one of my hates


 
Haaa, I remember that.


----------



## unpopular

gsgary said:


> Zoo photos posted in Wildlife,  that's a big one of my hates



Kinda goes along with my hatred of duck photography. It takes NO SKILL at all to take a generic photo of a duck that thinks your camera back is stuffed with bread crumbs.


----------



## JacaRanda

Admin, please separate the Nature & Wildlife category or change it to Nature & Animals.


----------



## limr

Taking pictures of your own feet while on a swing. GOD, I just HATE that! 






Feet by limrodrigues, on Flickr


----------



## unpopular

every time i see that photo, I think dang, she has TINY feet.


----------



## robbins.photo

JacaRanda said:


> Admin, please separate the Nature & Wildlife category or change it to Nature & Animals.



What fun would that be?  Lol


----------



## limr

unpopular said:


> every time i see that photo, I think dang, she has TINY feet.



Ah, merely an illusion.  I wear an 8.5.


----------



## unpopular

That's my size!

And you know what they say about men with big feet, right? Yeah. It's true


----------



## limr

So it's not just a cliche? 

(And you do know an 8.5 women's is about a 7 in men's, right?)


----------



## unpopular

Is it? 

Well, it's ... I mean THEY aren't that small.


----------



## limr

unpopular said:


> Is it?
> 
> Well, it's ... I mean THEY aren't that small.



Yup, women's and men's sizes use the same numbers but use different scales. (Former sneaker salewoman here  )


----------



## unpopular

Where is the "length" and "girth" column?


----------



## limr

unpopular said:


> Where is the "length" and "girth" row column?


----------



## JacaRanda

Going to start the "What Size Shoe Do You Wear" thread.


----------



## robbins.photo

JacaRanda said:


> Going to start the "What Size Shoe Do You Wear" thread.



Which will doubtless provoke a This Thread Is Useless without Pictures response, which will lead to photos of feet, which frankly is definitely not my cup of tea.  Lol


----------



## JacaRanda

robbins.photo said:


> JacaRanda said:
> 
> 
> 
> Going to start the "What Size Shoe Do You Wear" thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which will doubtless provoke a This Thread Is Useless without Pictures response, which will lead to photos of feet, which frankly is definitely not my cup of tea.  Lol
Click to expand...

 
Post of the quarter award!!!!!


----------



## unpopular

robbins.photo said:


> Which will doubtless provoke a This Thread Is Useless without Pictures response, which will lead to photos of feet, which frankly is definitely not my cup of tea.  Lol



I did not think so either, but I think that is a topic for the "So what about LSD" thread.


----------



## gsgary

unpopular said:


> every time i see that photo, I think dang, she has TINY feet.


My wife is only size 2 UK she has a hard time finding shoes,  but for her birthday I'm getting her some made to measure brogue boots


----------



## gsgary

robbins.photo said:


> JacaRanda said:
> 
> 
> 
> Admin, please separate the Nature & Wildlife category or change it to Nature & Animals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What fun would that be?  Lol
Click to expand...

I'm drunk now so watch it


----------



## sleist

unpopular said:


> oh. and ducks.


----------



## limr

Don't jump, duckie!


----------



## sleist

sleist said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> 
> oh. and ducks.
Click to expand...




Oh.  Just thought of one.

Moon shots ...


----------



## JacaRanda

Hmmm what shots are not cliche?  Careful,  don't give away any ideas.


----------



## robbins.photo

gsgary said:


> I'm drunk now so watch it



Wow. normally such a huge threat would have me shaking in Limr's shoes....

Well, you know, if they weren't so darn tiny.


----------



## vintagesnaps

Hey Gary, are you going to dance for us again?


I think once again Peeb's thread has gotten a little off track... Good question, but now I can't think of any good response, what with feet and duck butts and Gary's drunk and whatnot.


----------



## robbins.photo

vintagesnaps said:


> Hey Gary, are you going to dance for us again?



Ok, I realize their isn't a poll attached to this thread but can I put myself down for a no vote on this one?  Lol



> I think once again Peeb's thread has gotten a little off track... Good question, but now I can't think of any good response, what with feet and duck butts and Gary's drunk and whatnot.



Yup.. that duck butt pic was pretty much a thread topper.  Not really anywhere to go from there.. lol


----------



## unpopular

I think this is the second thread of Peeb's that I've completely derailed.


----------



## Derrel

sleist said:
			
		

> Oh.  Just thought of one.
> 
> Moon shots ...



Not to mention "*supermoon*" shots...especially those done with 18-55 zooms...without a doubt, one of THE most over-hyped,useless types of photo is the supermoon shot...


----------



## limr

Hey, is there a Photo Theme thread for cliches yet? If not, we should totally start one.  Or maybe I should suggest it for the theme of the next photo challenge.


----------



## rexbobcat

Circa 2009, complete with white untrimmed white edges from rotating without cropping in GIMP.


----------



## Fred Berg

The assumption that the word _*snapshot*_ is a pejorative term saddens me.


----------



## unpopular

How do you define "snapshot"?

To me its any image that lacks significance beyond those directly involved with the moment in time which it was taken. To me, it doesn't matter how visually or technically "good" or "bad" the image is.

A photograph is intended to inform (journalism),communicate (design) or explore (art), while creating it's own memory of itself through dialogue with the audience - the art object.

A snapshot _augments _the memory of those involved. The object is not the photograph, but the memory that the photograph is associated with.


----------



## Vtec44

One man's snapshot is another man's art.


----------



## Fred Berg

unpopular said:


> How do you define "snapshot"?
> 
> To me its any image that lacks significance beyond those directly involved with the moment in time which it was taken. To me, it doesn't matter how visually or technically "good" or "bad" the image is.
> 
> A photograph is intended to inform (journalism),communicate (design) or explore (art), while creating it's own memory of itself through dialogue with the audience - the art object.
> 
> A snapshot _augments _the memory of those involved. The object is not the photograph, but the memory that the photograph is associated with.



That's fine, unpopular, but why so many people feel the need to disparage something which has an important social function in capturing the moment is what baffles me. Snapshots do inform on a wider scale: if you want to know what people were doing in the 70's and 80's (or in 50's and 60's for that matter), you'll get a good idea by looking at collections of snapshots. 

In its quest to be accepted as art, photography is in danger of pushing aside something quintessential to itself.


----------



## Peeb

unpopular said:


> I think this is the second thread of Peeb's that I've completely derailed.


I welcome input- sane or otherwise.  

Thoroughly enjoying this thead in all it's glory.


----------



## gsgary

Cheesy dog photos 
https://m.facebook.com/DunstonLodge?refsrc=https://www.facebook.com/DunstonLodge 
Thats me and Rosie and 1st prize
4th row on photos last photo on right


----------



## unpopular

Fred Berg said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do you define "snapshot"?
> 
> To me its any image that lacks significance beyond those directly involved with the moment in time which it was taken. To me, it doesn't matter how visually or technically "good" or "bad" the image is.
> 
> A photograph is intended to inform (journalism),communicate (design) or explore (art), while creating it's own memory of itself through dialogue with the audience - the art object.
> 
> A snapshot _augments _the memory of those involved. The object is not the photograph, but the memory that the photograph is associated with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's fine, unpopular, but why so many people feel the need to disparage something which has an important social function in capturing the moment is what baffles me. Snapshots do inform on a wider scale: if you want to know what people were doing in the 70's and 80's (or in 50's and 60's for that matter), you'll get a good idea by looking at collections of snapshots.
> 
> In its quest to be accepted as art, photography is in danger of pushing aside something quintessential to itself.
Click to expand...


I agree completely. That's kind of the thing about it being a "snapshot", it's kind of up to the audience to decide. It's more about the audience's relationship.

When I was in art school, I had a habit of collecting every little bit of stranger's lives I came across. Notes, receipts, letters - stuff I'd find lying around discarded. For me these "snapshots" of people's lives did have value - but in reality, they only had value once I put value onto them.

Merely documenting something doesn't give it value. I could post here my checking account ledger, my daily blood pressure measurements, an install manifest of every software I've downloaded in the last year. For you, much of this information won't have a lot of significance. What difference does it make that yesterday I spent $23 on gas and $17 at the grocery store? It's a documentation of what I did, but it has no value to anyone except me.

So it's not so much that a "snapshot" is a property of the image, but rather a property of how the image is viewed.


----------



## AlanKlein

When you look at a snapshot of a person you love, you fall in love all over again. 

What could be more valuable?


----------



## unpopular

A snapshot of your loved ones isn't valuable to me at all.


----------



## Derrel

unpopular said:
			
		

> A snapshot of your loved ones isn't valuable to me at all.



But yet, when you were in art school you wrote that, "Notes, receipts, letters - stuff I'd find lying around discarded. For me these "snapshots" of people's lives did have value - but in reality, they only had value once I put value onto them."

Weird. But then, that was then. This is NOW! Or at least, I think this is now! Whatever happened to the cliches we's all suppose  ta' be hatin' on? lol.

I thought snapshots were now supposed to be called _vernacular photography_. Right? Cliches I love to hate....hmmm...baby bump with wood blocks on the name... "buck and doe" baby reveal cake photos...photo memes made with the Stay Thirsty, My Friends guy...you know--THIS dude!!!!


----------



## sleist

unpopular said:


> I think this is the second thread of Peeb's that I've completely derailed.



In all fairness, you did have a little help ...


----------



## Kenneth Walker

I try hard to appreciate HDR, but I still find it all a bit irritating.


----------



## Overread

OMG - its 7 pages and no one is fighting. 
I mean I know it haaaas happened in the past, but gosh darn it I'm not used to this concept of 7 pages in discussions and not locking something!



JacaRanda said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> Zoo photos posted in Wildlife,  that's a big one of my hates
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Haaa, I remember that.
Click to expand...


What's most amusing is that there is a way to fix that - just ensure that the number of pet and zoo photos gets so great that we have to open a new section to take the load


----------



## snowbear

Overread said:


> OMG - its 7 pages and no one is fighting.
> I mean I know it haaaas happened in the past, but gosh darn it I'm not used to this concept of 7 pages in discussions and not locking something!
> 
> 
> 
> JacaRanda said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> Zoo photos posted in Wildlife,  that's a big one of my hates
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Haaa, I remember that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What's most amusing is that there is a way to fix that - just ensure that the number of pet and zoo photos gets so great that we have to open a new section to take the load
Click to expand...


You tryin to start sumpin?  C'mere an say dat to ma face.


----------



## robbins.photo

Kenneth Walker said:


> I try hard to appreciate HDR, but I still find it all a bit irritating.



In fairness I have seen some HDR that is well done, but sadly there is way to much out there that is massively oversaturated and just looks terrible.  Not sure why people want to use it to take a perfectly good photograph and turn it into something that looks like a bad 3d rendering.


----------



## robbins.photo

Overread said:


> OMG - its 7 pages and no one is fighting.
> I mean I know it haaaas happened in the past, but gosh darn it I'm not used to this concept of 7 pages in discussions and not locking something!



That Is pretty weird, I mean normally you'd expect someone to have taken offense at something by now. 



> What's most amusing is that there is a way to fix that - just ensure that the number of pet and zoo photos gets so great that we have to open a new section to take the load



Well I'll see what I can do but no promises mind you.. lol


----------



## snowbear

robbins.photo said:


> That Is pretty weird, I mean normally you'd expect someone to have taken offense at something by now.



Maybe there are no arguments because everyone else thinks it is a fluff thread (no offense to the OP).  There aren't any arguments (or darn few, if there were) in LB and TCH, either - both being definitive examples of fluff threads.

Either that, or everyone that finds us offensive has us on ignore.


----------



## Designer

robbins.photo said:


> Not sure why people want to use it to take a perfectly good photograph and turn it into something that looks like a bad 3d rendering.


If one's point of reference is Hollywood movies and video games, then everything looks flat and dull UNLESS you go hog wild on the HDR.


----------



## DarkShadow

Sunset and sunrises.


----------



## snowbear

One-year-old smashing a birthday cake (guilty of this one).



DarkShadow said:


> Sunset and sunrises.


Which are frequently indistinguishable from each other.


----------



## unpopular

Kenneth Walker said:


> I try hard to appreciate HDR, but I still find it all a bit irritating.



If you're looking at an image and the first thing you think is HDR, then it's HDR done wrong.

If you're looking at an HDR and the first thing you think is "that's a great image" then it's HDR done right.

HDR should be the magician behind the curtain. It should be how an impossible exposure is made. It shouldn't be what the image is about.


----------



## snowbear

unpopular said:


> HDR should be the magician behind the curtain. It should be how an impossible exposure is made. It shouldn't be what the image is about.


Like fill-flash or CPLs - a method, not a subject.


----------



## Designer

snowbear said:


> DarkShadow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sunset and sunrises.
> 
> 
> 
> Which are frequently indistinguishable from each other.
Click to expand...

Unless in fast-motion video.  At least twice now I have noticed a video of the sun supposedly rising in the northern hemisphere, but it was actually a sunSET.  

I figure the videographer couldn't drag himself out of bed early enough to catch the sunrise, so he just recorded the sunset, and assumed that would suffice.  

Not a cliche, though, thank The Maker.


----------



## DarkShadow

Or drag them self out of bed to capture the sunrise and leave a one second fix tilted horizon.WTF


----------



## DarkShadow

Picture's of Bigfoot.


----------



## unpopular

DarkShadow said:


> Or drag them self out of bed to capture the sunrise and leave a one second fix tilted horizon.WTF



I think this is a result of sunset/rise photos being pretty exclusively subject-oriented eyecandy. The photographer is so absorbed with the perty colors, he or she doesn't notice the obvious.


----------



## snowbear

Designer said:


> Unless in fast-motion video.  At least twice now I have noticed a video of the sun supposedly rising in the northern hemisphere, but it was actually a sunSET.


I was referring to still photography, but , yes, video would show the difference as could a recognizable landmark, such as Portland Head light.



DarkShadow said:


> Picture's of Bigfoot.


Blobsquatches rule!


----------



## limr

Well, I guess there is a Photo Themes thread for cliches. It was kinda lame, though, but we could fix that, right?   (You KNOW we're all guilty!)

Cliché Photos or Typical Pics | Photography Forum


----------



## snowbear

limr said:


> Well, I guess there is a Photo Themes thread for cliches. It was kinda lame, though, but we could fix that, right?   (You KNOW we're all guilty!)
> 
> Cliché Photos or Typical Pics | Photography Forum



Done.


----------



## The_Traveler

I don't know if this is so much of a cliche as it is a cliched behaviour.

People getting all concerned and excited about even the most banal, dull photo as long as it was done with film and developed by the maker. 
The level of attention to even the most mediocre of results is just astounding.


----------



## unpopular

The_Traveler said:


> I don't know if this is so much of a cliche as it is a cliched behaviour.
> 
> People getting all concerned and excited about even the most banal, dull photo as long as it was done with film and developed by the maker.
> The level of attention to even the most mediocre of results is just astounding.



Yes! And the weird "grain is great" mentality. I get that sometimes it's useful, but more often than not, it's a nuisance.


----------



## rexbobcat

The_Traveler said:


> I don't know if this is so much of a cliche as it is a cliched behaviour.
> 
> People getting all concerned and excited about even the most banal, dull photo as long as it was done with film and developed by the maker.
> The level of attention to even the most mediocre of results is just astounding.



Before they even show their photos they always preface it with "ALL PHOTOS SHOT ON FILM." It's as if they're trying to say "You can't think my photos are bad because film is, like, really hard and stuff."


----------



## pixmedic

rexbobcat said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know if this is so much of a cliche as it is a cliched behaviour.
> 
> People getting all concerned and excited about even the most banal, dull photo as long as it was done with film and developed by the maker.
> The level of attention to even the most mediocre of results is just astounding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Before they even show their photos they always preface it with "ALL PHOTOS SHOT ON FILM." It's as if they're trying to say "You can't think my photos are bad because film is, like, really hard and stuff."
Click to expand...


haha, 
its like the "shot in natural light" disclaimer!


----------



## unpopular

SOOC bragging. All that says to me is that you're too lazy to learn RAW processing.


----------



## snowbear

unpopular said:


> SOOC bragging. All that says to me is that you're too lazy to learn RAW processing.


or don't know that it's still processed.


----------



## rexbobcat

pixmedic said:


> rexbobcat said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know if this is so much of a cliche as it is a cliched behaviour.
> 
> People getting all concerned and excited about even the most banal, dull photo as long as it was done with film and developed by the maker.
> The level of attention to even the most mediocre of results is just astounding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Before they even show their photos they always preface it with "ALL PHOTOS SHOT ON FILM." It's as if they're trying to say "You can't think my photos are bad because film is, like, really hard and stuff."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> haha,
> its like the "shot in natural light" disclaimer!
Click to expand...


The worst is when somebody uses the film angle to imply that YOU are supposed to look at their photos and think that it's amazing that someone could take such spectacular photos using a comparatively tedious and technically less forgiving medium.

Then if you don't they act like you killed their dog.


----------



## limr

Blah blah blah.


----------



## vintagesnaps

Gary, for a minute I was like - which one is you?? there's 400+ pictures on there!! lol but I found you, good for you and Rosie.  

Now you guys _had_ to start the film v. digital thing didn't ya? that ought to get the thread going downhill fast! lol Good is good and crap is crap, either way.

I don't usually care too much for selective color, a little seems to go a long way, but I don't know, that green hat is pretty awesome! Would go over big here on Green Beer Day (which is at a nearby college town and I stay away!).


----------



## thereyougo!

unpopular said:


> SOOC bragging. All that says to me is that you're too lazy to learn RAW processing.



In a similar vein, Wide open bragging...


----------



## Peeb

OK- if cross linking threads is a cliche, then this post is the rare and elusive TRIPLE-PLAY:

a) cross-linking
b) colorized b/w and 
c) Color vs b/w.

Having said all that, please help with this if you would:  Speaking of cliched photos... | Photography Forum


----------



## snowbear

Peeb said:


> OK- if cross linking threads is a cliche, then this post is the rare and elusive TRIPLE-PLAY:
> 
> a) cross-linking
> b) colorized b/w and
> c) Color vs b/w.
> 
> Having said all that, please help with this if you would:  Speaking of cliched photos... | Photography Forum



No, cross-posting is not cliche, it's just being indecisive and/or impatient.


----------



## Peeb

snowbear said:


> Peeb said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK- if cross linking threads is a cliche, then this post is the rare and elusive TRIPLE-PLAY:
> 
> a) cross-linking
> b) colorized b/w and
> c) Color vs b/w.
> 
> Having said all that, please help with this if you would:  Speaking of cliched photos... | Photography Forum
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, cross-posting is not cliche, it's just being indecisive and/or impatient.
Click to expand...

Let's go with BOTH


----------



## medic2230

snowbear said:


> Here's three pages worth - take your pick.
> http://www.thephotoforum.com/search/2487486/?q=Cliche&o=date&c[title_only]
> 
> Add "Fire Hydrants" to the list.  They seem to be a favorite for those taking photo classes when you get the "multiple views of a single object" assignment.



Wut? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			









DSC_5270 by Murphy Lege, on Flickr


----------



## The_Traveler

I don't know if anyone yet mentioned pealing paint, doors,windows and fire escapes.
Shot with film this would be the quinella of cliches.


----------



## JacaRanda

JacaRanda said:


> Hmmm what shots are not cliche?  Careful,  don't give away any ideas.


----------



## gsgary

The_Traveler said:


> I don't know if anyone yet mentioned pealing paint, doors,windows and fire escapes.
> Shot with film this would be the quinella of cliches.



Like this


----------



## limr

I don't understand why an entire medium would be considered a cliche. 

Whatever, I'll just be sitting here rolling my eyes.


----------



## snowbear

medic2230 said:


> snowbear said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here's three pages worth - take your pick.
> http://www.thephotoforum.com/search/2487486/?q=Cliche&o=date&c[title_only]
> 
> Add "Fire Hydrants" to the list.  They seem to be a favorite for those taking photo classes when you get the "multiple views of a single object" assignment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wut?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DSC_5270 by Murphy Lege, on Flickr
Click to expand...


Yeah - those!  Here's one of mine:


----------



## medic2230

snowbear said:


> medic2230 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> snowbear said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here's three pages worth - take your pick.
> http://www.thephotoforum.com/search/2487486/?q=Cliche&o=date&c[title_only]
> 
> Add "Fire Hydrants" to the list.  They seem to be a favorite for those taking photo classes when you get the "multiple views of a single object" assignment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wut?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DSC_5270 by Murphy Lege, on Flickr
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah - those!  Here's one of mine:
> 
> View attachment 107531
Click to expand...


I'll see your peeling paint and raise you a selective color beetle bug.





DSC_5471-Edit by Murphy Lege, on Flickr


----------



## snowbear

That actually works.


----------



## Derrel

medic2230 said:
			
		

> http://www.thephotoforum.com/search/2487486/?q=Cliche&o=date&c[title_only]
> 
> Add "Fire Hydrants" to the list.  They seem to be a favorite for those taking photo classes when you get the "multiple views of a single object" assignment.



Wut? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	








DSC_5270 by Murphy Lege, on Flickr[/QUOTE]




 
Hey--my yellow fire hydrant (but...with bees on it!) has the same exact shape as yours! WTF!??! How is that possible that two hydrants could look so,so similar? Aliens?


----------



## medic2230

Derrel said:


> medic2230 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.thephotoforum.com/search/2487486/?q=Cliche&o=date&c[title_only]
> 
> Add "Fire Hydrants" to the list.  They seem to be a favorite for those taking photo classes when you get the "multiple views of a single object" assignment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wut?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DSC_5270 by Murphy Lege, on Flickr
Click to expand...




Derrel said:


> View attachment 107532
> Hey--my yellow fire hydrant (but...with bees on it!) has the same exact shape as yours! WTF!??! How is that possible that two hydrants could look so,so similar? Aliens?



Must have been the OCF.


----------



## snowbear

Meuller.
Different size connections, though - we use 5-1/4"


----------



## Peeb

> How is that possible that two hydrants could look so,so similar? Aliens?





I'm not saying it was aliens, but it was Bigfoot


----------



## limr

Another yellow hydrant. AND it's on film! OH MY GOD, I'm such a hack!




yellow fire hydrant by limrodrigues, on Flickr


----------



## Peeb

Again, clearly Bigfoot.


----------



## medic2230

At least I feel better knowing my hydrant was red.


----------



## snowbear

We have those, too, but they are private owned and installed.  Where I live, they are yellow with a band of blue Scotchlite.  We efen have blue reflectors in the roadway that line up with them.

Where I work, most have been green over white or light grey but it looks like they are painting them all grey.

The University of Maryland has yellow and black.


----------



## medic2230

They use the blue reflectors down here to mark them also. Most down here are red but you will occasionally come across one that's another color.


----------



## unpopular

thereyougo! said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> 
> SOOC bragging. All that says to me is that you're too lazy to learn RAW processing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In a similar vein, Wide open bragging...
Click to expand...


This I don't even remotely understand. Not only is shooting wide open easier because you have plenty of exposure, composition is easier since your subject is inherently dominant.

One thing I love, not so much am bothered by, are when noobs shoot manual mode in a way that might as well be auto mode, feeling so proud when they've learned how to line up the little triangle with the zero.

All this says is that they still have NO IDEA what they're doing.


----------



## Derrel

RE: Wide open bragging...



			
				unpopular said:
			
		

> This I don't even remotely understand. Not only is shooting wide open easier because you have plenty of exposure, composition is easier since your subject is inherently dominant.



I am going to guess because shooting wide open means it's often very tough to get good focus, and since there's so little DOF in a lot of situations, many images end up being crappy, substandard, useless rejects... that's my thinking about the rational underlying wide open bragging. AT least for people with experience; there is also the, "I just got a new 50mm f/1.8, so I am shooting everything wide-open!" brigade. (Shooting in manual, wide-open, that is!)





 
Speaking of cliche shots...has anybody mentioned _WIDE-OPEN bokeh shots of Christmas lights_?


----------



## dennisbray

Black and white, highly sharpened photos. Black and white photos have their charm, yes. However I think a great number of people over use them. It's so easy to slap a B&W filter and taka e a bunch of photos. Even kids do it and it would still look arty.
You can always tell if a B&W photo was done by a pro or amateur, however I personally try to stay away from this.


----------



## rexbobcat

unpopular said:


> thereyougo! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> 
> SOOC bragging. All that says to me is that you're too lazy to learn RAW processing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In a similar vein, Wide open bragging...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This I don't even remotely understand. Not only is shooting wide open easier because you have plenty of exposure, composition is easier since your subject is inherently dominant.
> 
> One thing I love, not so much am bothered by, are when noobs shoot manual mode in a way that might as well be auto mode, feeling so proud when they've learned how to line up the little triangle with the zero.
> 
> All this says is that they still have NO IDEA what they're doing.
Click to expand...


I think they're mostly referring to people who shoot at at wide apertures almost exclusively regardless of the situation or need for it.

I know a few people who care more about _dat background blur _than having their subject's eyes in focus.


----------



## thereyougo!

^^^ This. (Quote doesn't work from mobile safari). There is a time and a place for a wide open shot. But the number of times I see someone post a shot saying. LOOK! I shot this wide open. Aren't I artistic?!  Low light isn't necessarily a good reason for it as cameras cope so well with higher ISOs now. The fact that you will find whole discussions just about bokeh wide open just says it all.

I'm not saying bokeh isn't important, but it shouldn't be the only reason for picking an f/1.4 over a f/2.8 on a lens with a maximum aperture of f/1.4. Heck on my Minolta 85 f/1.4 I still get great bokeh at f/2.8 but on researching the lens there were 100s of posts about quality of bokeh at f/1.4 without talking about colour, contrast and sharpness which is IMO more important than bokeh wide open. If all you have in focus on a bride's portrait is one eye it's going to be a challenge!  Her whole face might be soft except for her left eye but God, what great bokeh!


----------



## unpopular

Oh, I know. I'm just saying the shooting wide open is not going to be technically more difficult aside from [manual] focus, if anything, it should be easier - more exposure means less noise potential and hand-holdability. Narrow DOF definitely has it's place. I just don't see it as something to brag about.


----------



## gsgary

limr said:


> I don't understand why an entire medium would be considered a cliche.
> 
> Whatever, I'll just be sitting here rolling my eyes.


And film


----------



## limr

gsgary said:


> limr said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't understand why an entire medium would be considered a cliche.
> 
> Whatever, I'll just be sitting here rolling my eyes.
> 
> 
> 
> And film
Click to expand...


That too


----------

