# Contemporary Senior Girl



## Tally Ho

A favorite pose.  Most seniors love it. Most mothers wonder what happened to the top of her head.  Original (as usual) on Kodak Portra 160NC color negative film then digitized my my lab, Bronica GS 1 with a 150mm lens, F 8 @ 1/60 sec.

Tally Ho


----------



## Big Mike

Very pretty girl & I love the wide pupils.  Although she does seem to have a worried expression on her face.


----------



## Alison

I like the cropping and her eyes really stand out. Nice lighting as well. The background seems a little busy and distracting for this shot. I agree with Mike as well, her expression looks worried and I don't think that was the emotion intended.


----------



## danalec99

Neat!

Couple of queries...
a. How did you light her? 
b. Why is the hair on the right soft? You said f8, right?

Thanks


----------



## Tally Ho

danalec99 said:
			
		

> Neat!
> 
> Couple of queries...
> a. How did you light her?
> b. Why is the hair on the right soft? You said f8, right?
> 
> Thanks


 
"A"  Fill behind camera, hair light above and slightly behind her head aimed down, main to camera right, kicker at camera left behind and slightly above aimed down to skim her hair.

"B" The DOF decreases as the lens gets closer to the subject.  I was about 18 inches away from her.  My guess is the DOF was two to three inches.

Tally Ho


----------



## MDowdey

hmmm...wheres the picture chief?


----------



## Tally Ho

Apparantly the moderator removed the image and added "No Critiques, just applause" under my handle.  Rather childish I would say.  Perhaps a word to the owner of this site is in order.

Tally Ho


----------



## MDowdey

sorry bout that tally, looks like someone wanted to play a little practical joke. no harm done, can you change it, or would you prefer i did?


----------



## Alison

Just as an FYI, the attachements are missing due to the migration to the new server, noboby removed them.


----------



## Tally Ho

Thanks, but I already changed it.  Kinda scary that apparantly anyone can change this without the original poster's knowledge or consent.  I paid $25.00 so I could post images on this site but this may have been a mistake. I wonder if the owner of this site knows how his paying customers are being treated by the moderators here.  If this became public knowledge who knows what would happen to paying subscriptions.  

Tally


----------



## Tally Ho

AlisonPower said:
			
		

> Just as an FYI, the attachements are missing due to the migration to the new server, noboby removed them.


 
Humm, the images I posted the same day as this one, in the same forum as this one are still there.  Did only some images not make it to the new server?

Tally


----------



## voodoocat

Actually it's only the pretentious-holier-than-thou members being treated as such.


----------



## MDowdey

ill confess tally, i did it. but im no mod...im admin, member #50.


----------



## Tally Ho

voodoocat said:
			
		

> Actually it's only the pretentious-holier-than-thou members being treated as such.


 
So this would also include you I presume?

Tally Ho


----------



## terri

MDowdey said:
			
		

> ill confess tally, i did it. but im no mod...im admin, member #50.


 MD, I appreciate you saying that, but we all know it was me who did it.


----------



## MDowdey

terri said:
			
		

> MD, I appreciate you saying that, but we all know it was me who did it.




no no no, im a big boy, ill take the blame. it was me!


----------



## Alison

That's my understanding about the attachments. It wasn't only your attachments that were affected.

As for your subscription, nobody is required to pay to post an image. If you want to directly attach it you have to be a subscriber.

Other than a change in your title (which is a long standing tradition in TPF, ask any of the regulars here!) I don't see how you have been unfarily treated. You've posted images and I believe gotten fair assessments. People have taken the time to point out what they liked and also areas for improvement. That's what being a part of a photography community is all about. The intent is that members are here not just to share their knowledge, but also to learn from others.


----------



## Tally Ho

voodoocat said:
			
		

> Actually it's only the pretentious-holier-than-thou members being treated as such.


 
OIC, that means you are included in this group also, and that is why you know so much about it.  Thanks for the heads up.

Tally Ho


----------



## Hertz van Rental

No! I am Spartacus.


----------



## Corry

Hertz van Rental said:
			
		

> No! I am Spartacus.



Hey...wait..I thought I was Spartacus?


----------



## MDowdey

spartacus did it.


----------



## terri

MDowdey said:
			
		

> spartacus did it.


 He was befuddled at the time.


----------



## voodoocat

Tally Ho said:
			
		

> OIC, that means you are included in this group also, and that is why you know so much about it.  Thanks for the heads up.
> 
> Tally Ho


I see your comebacks are as formulated and boring as your approach to portraits.  Perhaps the third time will be a charm?


----------



## Corry

terri said:
			
		

> He was befuddled at the time.



Is befuddled the same as discombobulated?


----------



## terri

core_17 said:
			
		

> Is befuddled the same as discombobulated?


 Only Spartacus knows for sure.


----------



## MDowdey

i dont understand this thread anymore so heres a bunny..


----------



## Alison

I do believe this is the longest thread in the history of the portrait and wedding forum. CONGRATULATIONS!


----------



## terri

MDowdey said:
			
		

> i dont understand this thread anymore so heres a bunny..


 Aww....isn't that one of those special floppy-eared bunnies? Wonder what his cage smells like.....


----------



## MDowdey

terri said:
			
		

> Aww....isn't that one of those special floppy-eared bunnies? Wonder what his cage smells like.....




food pellets, wet wood shavings...and


rabbit crap.


----------



## voodoocat

I came for the constipated look... I stayed for the bunny!


----------



## MDowdey

voodoocat said:
			
		

> I came for the constipated look... I stayed for the bunny!




    

holy crap. so funny...


----------



## Tally Ho

AlisonPower said:
			
		

> Other than a change in your title (which is a long standing tradition in TPF, ask any of the regulars here!)


 
I don't mind a change from "Newbie" to "Moving UP"  but from "Newbie" to "No Critiques, Just Applause" I find offensive, and yes it is treating one unfairly.  

[/QUOTE]You've posted images and I believe gotten fair assessments. People have taken the time to point out what they liked and also areas for improvement. That's what being a part of a photography community is all about. The intent is that members are here not just to share their knowledge, but also to learn from others.[/QUOTE]

No complaint here, but it seems to me that when I post images, I'm accused of being pretentious and holier than thou.  Why?  Perhaps because I take the time to explain how they were done.  In the future I will simply post images with no explanation as to how they were done.  

Tally Ho


----------



## MDowdey

Tally Ho said:
			
		

> No complaint here, but it seems to me that when I post images, I'm accused of being pretentious and holier than thou.  Why?  Perhaps because I take the time to explain how they were done.  In the future I will simply post images with no explanation as to how they were done.
> 
> Tally Ho



I believe you have missed the point entirely.

When you respond to someone, or post anything you ARE pretentious and holier than thou. We dont know you, we dont know your style very well, As a matter of fact, all we know is what we read, and what we have read so far has made everyone turn away from your work. Do you do this with clients? If so, how do you make any money?

Furthermore, The staff of Thephotoforum.com reserves the rights to change titles at will.  We have done this in the past in jest to others , and if you cant take the heat, get out of the kitchen man.


----------



## Corry

I had a custom title given to me a long time ago, before we were able to change it on our own.  And Terri had a perdy pink 'un.


----------



## Alison

If you take a look at the custom titles around here they are usually as a joke. Sorry if you found it offensive.

If you're asking for an honest assessment as to why people get the impression that you are pretentious and holier than thou I can give you my thoughts. Giving an explanation of how you created the shot is great. However, giving the impression that your way (the way that you studied from a "master photographer" with a set of rules) is the ONLY way is where you will give people a distinct impression of you. In this area of the forum we are all here because we are in some way connected to wedding and portrait photography. Some of us own a business, others are hoping to, and some come to visit to improve their portrait skills. 

Guidlines are great, but if you spend so much time concentrating on them that you feel that anyone who deviates is wrong, you are shutting yourself off from a valuable learning experience. As a community we are here to learn and grow with each other. I have a different style than Daniel and John (who post wedding photos here regularly) but I still learn from them, and I hope they can do the same from my contributions. Portrait and Wedding photography goes beyond great lighing and posing. A good portrait will capture the essence of the person, who they really are. The same with wedding photography. A beautiful photo of the bride, carefully posed and well lit is nice, and surely will be in their album. But yet the couple also looks for the photos where the cake is smashed into their new spouse's face, and the shot where the bride is dancing with her ring bearer. My point being that there is a balance in a photographers work. Nobody will argue that lighting and posing are important. However, if you help your client feel at ease, the portrait becomes a living piece of art, not just the documentation of a fraction in time.


----------



## terri

core_17 said:
			
		

> I had a custom title given to me a long time ago, before we were able to change it on our own. And Terri had a perdy pink 'un.


 And I hate pink! :x


----------



## Karalee

Wow, I remember the days when people were BEGGING for custom titles, and they never got them, in fact I still see a lot of people with their titles they were given. Its like being knighted at tpf  - however most of us can take a joke, and find its okay to be able to laugh at ourselves.


----------



## MDowdey

thats all gonna happen again!!!! custom titles are going to be reinstated for people who ask...better watch out world!


----------



## terri

> I don't mind a change from "Newbie" to "Moving UP" but from "Newbie" to "No Critiques, Just Applause" I find offensive, and yes it is treating one unfairly.


 How about "sex sells!!" ?? Would you like that better?  That was the first custom title I was given here, and that was done wayyyy before members had the option of doing anything about it. I certainly didn't feel I was being treated unfairly; I knew I was being teased by the higher ups on some comments I'd made. All I could do was laugh....so I did.  I lived with that title for months, before someone else thought of this one I currently have. I've yet to come up with my own title, even though I can change it now. 

You might loosen your belt a notch or two and take a chuckle. Most of us common mortals do better when we don't take ourselves too seriously, regardless of how seriously we may approach our artistic expression. 

Lighten up, already! :sun:


----------



## elsaspet

"Before you read my above posting did you know what the word 'photograph' meant? I would guess 75% of the people who regularly use a camera don't know what it means."

"I see it is time to post "The 25 Rules For Better Portraits" for those who would like to learn portraiture from a master photographer. I will dig them up and post them for all to see."

Tally Ho,
I of course speak only for myself, but I think it's the quotes such as above that rub people the wrong way.  There are many, many professional photographers on this board, in ALL areas of photography. There are others on this board, some you insist on tangling with that are aclaimed photographers.  And, as with all art based things,  photography is a place that the hobbiest and newbie can excel without ever collecting one red cent for their beautiful works.  Photography is also an artform that is celebrated for it's originality.  Tips and Pointers are nice, but there are no hard and fast rules.
Just because you read a book by someone who refers to themselves as a Master Photographer, and have had Mom's pay for student and wedding photography, it doesn't make you the end all of advice.  Your photos are nice, to be sure.  It is obvious that you know your equipment.  But you really shouldn't assume that your way is the only way.  Take a look in Vanity Fair.  Rarely does the cover follow all these rules that you live by, but unquestionably it is considered some of the finestest portriature in the world.
Hopefully, you will see this post as just a way of communication and not a personal assault.  If you see it as an assault, you are welcome to "spank me, I'm naughty".
:greenpbl:


----------



## Tally Ho

(Cut and paste) "However, giving the impression that your way (the way that you studied from a "master photographer" with a set of rules) is the ONLY way is where you will give people a distinct impression of you."

I have never either said or implied that my way is the only way.  Some however may read into my detailed descriptions that I am saying this is the only way, perhaps because of preconceived notions.  I cannot control how my postings are read on the other end, only the reader can.  The written word tends to be 'harsher' than the spoken word and I have discovered is frequently read that exact way, especially on the 'net.  

I have in the past attempted to show that this particular method, pose, lighting diagram or whatever is ONE tried and true way that has worked for me and for others.  In the future I will refrain from giving any details as to how I lit or posed any of my images, that way I cannot offend any others here and we can be one big happy family.

Tally Ho


----------



## MDowdey

elsaspet said:
			
		

> you are welcome to "spank me, I'm naughty".
> :greenpbl:





DAMN. I MEAN DAMN!!!!!!

IM JEALOUS.


----------



## voodoocat

> (Cut and paste)


BTW, there are quote tags that work nicely for quoting someone.


----------



## elsaspet

MDowdey said:
			
		

> DAMN. I MEAN DAMN!!!!!!
> 
> IM JEALOUS.


 
Sorry, Tally Ho, MDowdy just moved ahead of you.  I dig his groovy avatar.


----------



## MDowdey

elsaspet said:
			
		

> Sorry, Tally Ho, MDowdy just moved ahead of you.  I dig his groovy avatar.





damn :heart:  :heart:  :heart:  :heart:  :thumbup:  :thumbup:  :thumbup:  :mrgreen:  :mrgreen:  :hugs:  :hugs:  :hug::  :hug::      



hell yes.


----------



## Hertz van Rental

Tally Ho said:
			
		

> I have never either said or implied that my way is the only way.  Some however may read into my detailed descriptions that I am saying this is the only way, perhaps because of preconceived notions.  I cannot control how my postings are read on the other end, only the reader can.  The written word tends to be 'harsher' than the spoken word and I have discovered is frequently read that exact way, especially on the 'net.
> 
> I have in the past attempted to show that this particular method, pose, lighting diagram or whatever is ONE tried and true way that has worked for me and for others.  In the future I will refrain from giving any details as to how I lit or posed any of my images, that way I cannot offend any others here and we can be one big happy family.
> 
> Tally Ho


It is not the detailed descriptions that people have a problem with - it is the pompous way you hand them down as if they are great truths.
They are just one approach - and a very restrictive one at that.
And if you refrain from giving details, no matter. The photographers here can figure it out - your lighting method is quite basic after all.

And of course you can control how your postings are read. It's all in the writing.


----------



## thebeginning

another hilarious thread. it is threads like these that keep me coming back to TPF.


----------



## Tally Ho

Hertz van Rental said:
			
		

> The photographers here can figure it out - your lighting method is quite basic after all.
> 
> And of course you can control how your postings are read. It's all in the writing.


 
Yup, basic.  If it sells, then I'm happy.

Tally Ho


----------



## inneist

Hello,

My first time in this Portrait & Wedding Photography forum. 

Just curious, Tally, can you show me one master portrait that in your opinion best illustrates the lightning method as you suggested? Thanks.


----------



## Hertz van Rental

Tally Ho said:
			
		

> If it sells, then I'm happy.


You don't strike me as a very happy person.


----------



## elsaspet

Tally Ho said:
			
		

> Yup, basic. If it sells, then I'm happy.
> 
> Tally Ho


 
I think we all know that money doesn't buy happiness.  And it certainly won't by you respect.  Why don't you go out and break a few rules?  Take a photo just for the giggle of it?  Help someone just starting out by pointing out what is good in their photo and then give a kind suggestion on how they might be able to make it even better, and then watch them grow.  Maybe you could just throw away your rules for a while, and look at something completely different and find the beauty, or humor, or creativity in it.  Finding humility is what's gonna bring you happiness.
Ok, I've gotta light some incense now, and put on some bell bottom pants.  Look what you have done to me!:flower:


----------



## Alison

Cindy, do you know if they make those pants in maternity style? If so, I'm right there with you :thumbsup:


----------



## elsaspet

Hmmm Alison, I think they must!  For sure one of those big flowing shirts with the big sleeves.  Hell, throw some leather fringe in there and beads just for good measure.  Just don't go donning any of those damn lace up clogs or platform heals for Chriminy!  You have to be careful!:hug:: 
Come on over to my place and we will put on some Zeplin and fire one up.  Ok, just music.   I think my inner twenty year old took over there for a moment!!!!


----------



## terri

elsaspet said:
			
		

> Ok, I've gotta light some incense now, and put on some bell bottom pants. Look what you have done to me!:flower:


 I've got the sandalwood fired up already. A little George Harrison and we're set, babe.


----------



## voodoocat

Alright already.. enough with the hippy talk!


----------



## elsaspet

terri said:
			
		

> I've got the sandalwood fired up already. A little George Harrison and we're set, babe.


 
Sandalwood was exactly what the occasion  is calling for Terri!  I'm even going to put on some of my Patchouli oil I am so fond of wearing.  But the music, now there is where we differ.  This is definately a Tull moment!


----------



## voodoocat

Now y'all need to get MD to hook ya up with some birkenstocks :razz:


----------



## elsaspet

voodoocat said:
			
		

> Alright already.. enough with the hippy talk!


 
Oh you should talk with "where have all the wildflowers gone"?  :greenpbl:


----------



## elsaspet

voodoocat said:
			
		

> Now y'all need to get MD to hook ya up with some birkenstocks :razz:


 
MD?  I really need those birkenstocks.  They work so well at the commune.  Please?


----------



## terri

elsaspet said:
			
		

> Sandalwood was exactly what the occasion is calling for Terri! I'm even going to put on some of my Patchouli oil I am so fond of wearing. But the music, now there is where we differ. This is definately a Tull moment!


 Hey girl, I like "Cross Eyed Mary" as much as the next old hippy.


----------



## elsaspet

Well I think "Living in the Past" in more intune with the thread........but Cross Eyed Mary WROCKS!
Oh, and I have been called on the "bell bottom" pants thing.  I have been informed that they are flairs or loons.  Please consider me appropriately groovy now.


----------



## terri

elsaspet said:
			
		

> Well I think "Living in the Past" in more intune with the thread........but Cross Eyed Mary WROCKS!
> Oh, and I have been called on the "bell bottom" pants thing. I have been informed that they are flairs or loons. Please consider me appropriately groovy now.


 Loons....? :scratch: I've not heard of that one. A flair isn't a true bell-bottom, anyway - it just a pants bottom that's not a stovepipe. Also known as "boot-cuts". 

I stand by bell-bottom. Heck, we used to cut up the side-seams and sew in addtional cool fabric to make them wider - purple paisley was one of my faves. :sillysmi:


----------



## MDowdey

elsaspet said:
			
		

> MD?  I really need those birkenstocks.  They work so well at the commune.  Please?





sure come and try and pair of em on, and see whatcha like, and you are walking outta here with them!


----------



## voodoocat

"they're all rejects from sixties, get some jobs you filthy hippies"


----------



## elsaspet

terri said:
			
		

> Loons....? :scratch: I've not heard of that one. A flair isn't a true bell-bottom, anyway - it just a pants bottom that's not a stovepipe. Also known as "boot-cuts".
> 
> :sillysmi:


 
Try to tell that to the Brits.........


----------



## photogoddess

Dammit guys... trying to steal my thunder??? You all know I did it.... (in the basement, with a revolver.)


----------



## JonMikal

elsaspet said:
			
		

> "spank me, I'm naughty".
> :greenpbl:


 
geez, i NEVER get these offers.  Tally Ho, you da man!


----------



## Christie Photo

Wow...  miss a day, miss a LOT.

I'll put in my thoughts.  First, I'm never happy about entering into a serious discussion with someone who is anonymous.  I don't know who you are, Tally Ho.  I dont know where you work.  I know nothing about your background and accomplishments.  I don't even know your name.  This makes it impossible for me to take much of what you have to say seriously.  I prefer you stand in the light.

The way you have presented yourself and your work for viewing/critique does invite a challenge.  There are others here familiar with the "rules" to which you subscribe.  I learned these same rules more than twenty years ago, attending seminars and such with folks like Blair, Kennemer, Zeltzman, Collins, Zucher, and so on.  I try to apply these rules to my work.  As a result, I feel my work has become a bit antiquated.  Saleable, sure...  but stagnant.  We all have to move beyond these "building blocks" of portraitue if we want our work to evolve.  I'm learning some new approaches here.  Come down from the soapbox for a while.  You think you'll be surprised.

Now, in your defense, I think we've all heard the phrase, "Remember to be good before we remember to be different."  These compositional rules are important... just as technical rules of exposure are important.

Another familiar quote is, "It's not creative unless it sells."  No one knows this more than the photographer who is trying to eek out a living in a studio.  No matter how happy we are with our recent accomplishments, if it's not selling, you're not eating.

Your work is consistant, and in a real world application, certainly up to par.  Lighten up!  If you're here to show us how good you are, you're in the wrong place.  Try the PPofA.  If you want to share what you've learned and get some impute from others, change your posture... because you don't come off thay way.

-Pete Christie


----------



## Tally Ho

tsienni said:
			
		

> Hello,
> 
> My first time in this Portrait & Wedding Photography forum.
> 
> Just curious, Tally, can you show me one master portrait [photographer] that in your opinion best illustrates the lightning method as you suggested? Thanks.


 
Nope, can't think of just one, but I can think of four that I have studied under. Frank Cricchio, Monte Zucker, Don Peterson and Don Blair, all masters and all craftsman.  BUT keep in mind two of these guys are dead and the other two are over 65.

I find it interesting that I'm still getting comments on the image especially since it was 'lost' three days ago when they went to a 'new server.'

Tally Ho


----------



## Tally Ho

Thanks Pete, a breath of fresh air.



tally


----------



## Christie Photo

Tally Ho said:
			
		

> I find it interesting that I'm still getting comments on the image especially since it was 'lost' three days ago when they went to a 'new server.'



Now, ya see?  What's this meant to be?  Is it some sort of accusation?  Do you mean you feel some sort of justification?  I'm wondering why you made this statement.  I think this is the sort of thing that's drawing so much fire.

BTW....  what IS your name?

-Pete


----------



## danalec99

tsienni said:
			
		

> _Just curious, Tally, can you show me one master portrait [photographer] that in your opinion best illustrates the lightning method as you suggested? Thanks._





			
				Tally Ho said:
			
		

> Nope, can't think of just one, but I can think of four that I have studied under. Frank Cricchio, Monte Zucker, Don Peterson and Don Blair, all masters and all craftsman. BUT keep in mind two of these guys are dead and the other two are over 65.


Tally Ho, we are not against your knowledge. It is actually great to know that you were groomed by these maestros. Its all excellent . 
But, the way you lay it out is a huge turn off for most of us. You speak as if everyone else other than you are cavemen or anyone who does not follow the Monte Zuckarian principles are lowly. No you did not say that, but that is how I read it when I come accross your posts. A pompous attitude is usually never welcomed. By the way, M Zucker I hear is known for his humility.

So, do you have a link to your website/work?


----------



## Christie Photo

danalec99 said:
			
		

> By the way, M Zucker I hear is known for his humility.




hehehehe.  Humble?  Monty?   :er:  Maybe he's been through a life-altering experience.


----------



## danalec99

Christie Photo said:
			
		

> hehehehe.  Humble?  Monty?   :er: Maybe he's been through a life-altering experience.


Well, this photographer from another forum had a lot of words to write about how caring, kind, considerate, humble etc etc MZ is to his disciples. Don't know nothing more about the maestro!


----------



## inneist

Tally Ho said:
			
		

> Nope, can't think of just one, but I can think of four that I have studied under. Frank Cricchio, Monte Zucker, Don Peterson and Don Blair, all masters and all craftsman.  BUT keep in mind two of these guys are dead and the other two are over 65.



Thanks for your reply. I´m honored to get your response. Hehe, I hope I don´t sound cynical, for I am not.

I am not qualified to make judgments on how great those four photographers are. Actually, if possible, can we focus on ideas? Could you please show me but one example of their works that embodies those essential elements about which you feel strongly in portrait photography?


----------



## photo gal

Ok. I would like to weigh in here.  Tally I believe there are some of us here who have a lot to learn from you and I for one am here to learn and can see you have a lot to offer.  On the other hand right away I noticed that your manner was quite off putting and I interpreted your delivery as arrogant and self-serving and so I personally shied away.  This community has been a wonderful place to come to and the sheer variety and levels of competancy here make it a safe place for all to share their work and their progress and to have others kindly help them along and cheer them on.  You kinda came in like a bull in a china shop and while you may not be here to make friends I am quite confident you did not come here to make enemies.  So I would like to propose that you chalk this up to a learning experience and move past it so that we can garner from you what knowledge you do have to share.  Thanks for listening!!!  : )


----------



## Tally Ho

tsienni said:
			
		

> Thanks for your reply. I´m honored to get your response. Hehe, I hope I don´t sound cynical, for I am not.
> 
> I am not qualified to make judgments on how great those four photographers are. Actually, if possible, can we focus on ideas? Could you please show me but one example of their works that embodies those essential elements about which you feel strongly in portrait photography?


 
I have numerous images made by Master Photographer Don Blair. Unfortunately, he died last year, and what a wonderful teacher, gentleman and photographer he was.  When he was teaching at Winona International School of Professional Photography I took the advanced portrait class from him and I bought one of his books, "Body Parts" from which I scanned the portrait below.  I am big into leaning, as was Don, I am sold on the head tilt as was Don.  I like properly posed hands as did Don, and I like short lighting as did Don.  The image below embodies all of these elements.

Tally Ho


----------



## hobbes28

I have a few things I want to know/share.  First, I'm feeling pretty sharing so I'm going to share a few definitions myself.  Especially since you like to share them so much.

*tact* 

  ([font=verdana,sans-serif] P [/font])  *Pronunciation Key*  (t
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




kt)
_n._ 
Acute sensitivity to what is proper and appropriate in dealing with others, including the ability to speak or act without offending.
 _Archaic._ The sense of touch. 
 *re·spect* 

  ([font=verdana,sans-serif] P [/font])  *Pronunciation Key*  (r
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




-sp
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




kt
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




)
_tr.v._ *re·spect·ed,* *re·spect·ing,* *re·spects * 
 To feel or show deferential regard for; esteem.
 To avoid violation of or interference with: respect the speed limit.
To relate or refer to; concern. 
 _n._ 
A feeling of appreciative, often deferential regard; esteem. See Synonyms at regard.
 The state of being regarded with honor or esteem.
 Willingness to show consideration or appreciation.
 *respects* Polite expressions of consideration or deference: pay one's respects.
A particular aspect, feature, or detail: In many respects this is an important decision. 
Now, if you're still reading because you seem to lack the second definition for other people that you don't view to be in your "class", I have a question:  what qualifies someone to be a master of photography?  Is it someone that makes no errors in their work?  Is it someone that has been published?  I don't kid when I ask this question because people are referred to as professional out of context all of the time and I think of masters of things like the guitar as a person who seldomly makes a mistake and changes the art for years to come.  Example in this would be Steve Vai.  If you have any more insight on this, feel free to let me know.


----------



## photogoddess

Hobbes,
I do believe you left out humility.

*hu·mil·i·ty*  (hy-ml-t)
n.

    The quality or condition of being humble.


----------



## Christie Photo

hobbes28 said:
			
		

> I have a question:  what qualifies someone to be a master of photography?.



I'll try to field this one.  It's been a long time since I bailed from the Professional Photographers of America (PPA), but I can give you the gist of it.

Members (paid members) may earn "merits" either by attending or presenting classes at an accredited school, or by entering into the print competion at an accredited judging as at a state PPA convention or at national.

Merits don't come cheap.  The week-long classes taught by working professionals are expensive and so can be entering into competition.

A photographer that amasses 25 merits earns the degree of Master of Photography.  At least 13 of these merits must be earned through competion.  

A photographer that gathers 25 merits earns the degree of Craftsman.  At least 13 of these merits must be earned though classes.

The print judging is tough.  Images are scored by multiple judges on a scale of 1-100 (not really... you'll see why).  A print scoring 80 earns an automatic merit.  As a result, the judging pretty much is based on 80.  If they want you to have the merit, you get the 80.  79's are hard to swallow.  Anything over 80 is quite a nice statement.  The slang is to say your print "hung," since it is an automatic to "hang" on display at national.  There, there's on additional in-out judging to decide if it will be included in the traveling loan collection....  another merit, of course.

I wonder if our friend has had any of his prints hang.


----------



## Hertz van Rental

Ah! So becoming a Master of Photography is just a matter of getting a piece of paper awarded by the PPA for playing the game and paying them cash.
We have some organisations like that here in the UK.
They give awards for taking a picture that looks like everyone else's, too.
So 'Master Photographer' in this context would mean 'I do it by the numbers but have no real talent or originality'?


----------



## Christie Photo

Hertz van Rental said:
			
		

> Ah! So becoming a Master of Photography is just a matter of getting a piece of paper awarded by the PPA for playing the game and paying them cash.



Yeah...  we do the same thing in our Universities.



			
				Hertz van Rental said:
			
		

> So 'Master Photographer' in this context would mean 'I do it by the numbers but have no real talent or originality'?



Sometimes.  Those folks take longer to achieve Master.  The talented ones do it much more quickly and tend to be trend setters.


----------



## Tally Ho

Hertz van Rental said:
			
		

> Ah! So becoming a Master of Photography is just a matter of getting a piece of paper awarded by the PPA for playing the game and paying them cash.
> We have some organisations like that here in the UK.
> They give awards for taking a picture that looks like everyone else's, too.
> So 'Master Photographer' in this context would mean 'I do it by the numbers but have no real talent or originality'?


 
Yup, Hertz a piece of paper, just like our medical doctors.  They have these pieces of paper that says they played the game and gave their universities lots and lots of money, but they really don't know anything at all about medical stuff.  Oh by the way, the last time we contacted master photographer Frank Cricchio about speaking to our affiliate, his going rate was $6500.00 for three days plus all meals, plus his hotel room and we pay transportation from Texas.  Not too bad for a guy who just has a 'piece of paper' and 'no real talent or originality' I would say.  Does anyone on this site command those kind of prices just to talk?

Tally Ho


----------



## MDowdey

Tally Ho said:
			
		

> They have these pieces of paper that says they played the game and gave their universities lots and lots of money, but they really don't know anything at all about medical stuff.
> Tally Ho




you sir, are a cock.

If it wasnt for so called "know nothing" medical doctors, i wouldnt be here, and niether would my mom. You have no idea what you are talking about 99% of the time. Im personally offended now, and im honored to be the one to tell you off.

I wish people like you would mysteriously vanish into thin air. THAT WAY YOU WONT BE USING ANYMORE OF MY VALUABLE OXYGEN.


but you can always PM me if you want to discuss this. I must warn you though, im a MASTER in making people wish they werent born.

matthew


----------



## danalec99

Tally Ho said:
			
		

> Oh by the way, the last time we contacted master photographer Frank Cricchio about speaking to our affiliate, his going rate was $6500.00 for three days plus all meals, plus his hotel room and we pay transportation from Texas. Not too bad for a guy who just has a 'piece of paper' and 'no real talent or originality' I would say. lly Ho


1. The price seems real low. I can show you a bunch of photographers with much much much higher rates. And they do not have no piece of paper.
2. Charge is not necessarily dictated by the piece of paper, the master tag or talent. Good marketing plays a huge role.


----------



## photo gal

Tally Ho said:
			
		

> Does anyone on this site command those kind of prices just to talk?
> 
> Tally Ho



Well, I do a little more than talk, but still!


----------



## Sharkbait

This thread is edging very close to getting locked.  Please keep it civil on all accounts.


----------



## MDowdey

lock it. i dont care.


----------



## Sharkbait

See my longer response in the other thread.


----------



## Christie Photo

Tally Ho said:
			
		

> ...the last time we contacted master photographer Frank Cricchio about speaking to our affiliate...




WHICH affiliate?  By the way, I didn't catch your name.

-Pete


----------



## inneist

Tally Ho said:
			
		

> I am big into leaning, as was Don, I am sold on the head tilt as was Don.  I like properly posed hands as did Don, and I like short lighting as did Don.  The image below embodies all of these elements.



I checked out your quoted "Hot tips for PORTRAIT photography".  The last one reads:



> Dont Photograph The Back of Women's Hands



This is the thing I find most incredible. I understand why this could be the case under certain circumstances but when you elevate it to an absolute truth this belief strikes to me just false. I think you have to consider the hands with respect to other parts of the body. One example, this Rafael´s painting shows the back of the hands of Donna, she just looks feminine as you could possibly imagine.

http://www.voideity.com/artists/La_Donna_Velata_Raphael.jpg

Read you later.


----------



## Hertz van Rental

Tally Ho said:
			
		

> Does anyone on this site command those kind of prices just to talk?


I was getting paid $1,000 a day, plus ex's, to take pictures in the 80's so if you factor in for inflation I think I'm up there....
But to try to equate someone who has got a piece of paper from a club to say that they are good at taking pictures with a practitioner of medicine is just a little bit silly, don't you think?
And if you had ever gone to a proper University to do a Degree you would find there was an awful lot more to it than presenting a few pictures to the PPA.


----------



## Tally Ho

tsienni said:
			
		

> I checked out your quoted "Hot tips for PORTRAIT photography". The last one reads:
> 
> 
> 
> This is the thing I find most incredible. I understand why this could be the case under certain circumstances but when you elevate it to an absolute truth this belief strikes to me just false. I think you have to consider the hands with respect to other parts of the body. One example, this Rafael´s painting shows the back of the hands of Donna, she just looks feminine as you could possibly imagine.
> 
> http://www.voideity.com/artists/La_Donna_Velata_Raphael.jpg
> 
> Read you later.


 
These rules are not 'hard and fast', 'cannot be broken because you will be convicted and thrown into prison' type of rules, they are rules that for the most part should be used in most portraiture, and breaking them may be done once they are learned.  Of course you can shoot all day and break all of them on every image if you want, and the only thing to suffer will be your paycheck.

As far as the back of the hand, the illustration shown in the book along side the rule shows the full and flat back of the hand.  Raphael in your example has carefully hidden about 1/2 of the hand behind her dress.

Mr Dowdey, please lighten up as we are on the same side.  I was making a point about pieces of paper.  Hertz said that a piece of paper is worthless.  I was making a point that pieces of paper ARE NOT worthless.  We would all be in a world of hurt if not for medical doctors.  I have the utmost respect for them. 

Tally Ho


----------



## MDowdey

oh im as calm as a hindu cow.


i think we have all said enough, and you know my stance on you. its cool.


md


----------



## Tally Ho

Hertz van Rental said:
			
		

> I was getting paid $1,000 a day, plus ex's, to take pictures in the 80's so if you factor in for inflation I think I'm up there....
> But to try to equate someone who has got a piece of paper from a club to say that they are good at taking pictures with a practitioner of medicine is just a little bit silly, don't you think?
> And if you had ever gone to a proper University to do a Degree you would find there was an awful lot more to it than presenting a few pictures to the PPA.


 
Wow, I'm impressed, $1000.00 a day and in the 1980's no less.  I can see why you commanded these kind of prices after looking at your latest submissions.  Now we are talking some really awesome work there, almost like Ansel Adams except in color. Keep it up.  

Tally Ho


----------



## Christie Photo

MDowdey said:
			
		

> oh im as calm as a hindu cow.




I love it.


----------



## MDowdey

thanks


----------



## Christie Photo

Hertz van Rental said:
			
		

> ...if you had ever gone to a proper University to do a Degree you would find there was an awful lot more to it than presenting a few pictures to the PPA.




It's really not a simple task.  It shouldn't be diminished.  In fact, the process produces more real-world value than a classroom.



			
				Hertz van Rental said:
			
		

> I was getting paid $1,000 a day, plus ex's, to take pictures in the 80's so if you factor in for inflation I think I'm up there...




This IS a proper scale, and one to be proud of.  My hat's off to you.

-Pete


----------



## Hertz van Rental

Tally Ho said:
			
		

> Wow, I'm impressed, $1000.00 a day and in the 1980's no less.  I can see why you commanded these kind of prices after looking at your latest submissions.  Now we are talking some really awesome work there, almost like Ansel Adams except in color. Keep it up.
> 
> Tally Ho


Please don't try and be sarcastic, it just makes you look stupid.
I used to work in Advertising (you would call it Commercial).
If you had read my posts you would have seen that I am doing Landscape as therapy. It was always my weakest area and I just want to get back to taking pictures again.
I suppose you do portraits for similar reasons.


----------



## Corry

Zzzzzing!


----------



## danalec99

Tally Ho said:
			
		

> These rules are not 'hard and fast', 'cannot be broken because you will be convicted and thrown into prison' type of rules, they are rules that for the most part should be used in most portraiture, and breaking them may be done once they are learned. *Of course you can shoot all day and break all of them on every image if you want, and the only thing to suffer will be your paycheck*.


Repeat after me Mr. Ho... *M A R K E T*. 

I like the S-Class, my cousin prefers the 7 series. Does it make either of it a better automobile?
You have a style, you like your style, and obviously there is a market for it. But it _is_ a fact that there are other markets. It is so immature to think that paychecks will be affected if people won't adhere to _*your*_ tablet of laws.

Cant you just see it?!


----------



## elsaspet

danalec99 said:
			
		

> It is so immature to think that paychecks will be affected if people won't adhere to _*your*_ tablet of laws.


 
  Kinda reminds me of Moses.  Homoses.


----------



## Tally Ho

Sorry, but here is what I see locally. A number of years ago a new photographer opened up a studio, learned the craft from the masters, but then after a few years decided he was not getting the 'rush' it once gave him, so he turned the studio over to his assistant.  He didn't give her much in the way of photographic education because she was artistic and freewheeling and into candid portraits.  She was 'up against' two master photographers in her county of 50,000, plus several other 'good' solid portraitists in a nearby county.  She closed the business after three years.  Does this happen all over?  I would guess so, but don't know that for a fact.

I take from the above situation that people in my area like well posed, well executed, well lit portraits like they see in the windows of the established 'main street' photographers.  Actually, in my nearly 25 years in this business, I have seen probably a dozen (or more) photographers come and go in my town of 10,000.  Mere flashes in the pan. All were candid shooters, none took the time to learn the rules, or pose or light their subjects well, they just fired away, hoping for one good image out of several hundred.  OTOH there are three established portrait photographers in my town, none are candid shooters (except at weddings) all have learned the rules, have learned that they can be broken sometimes and all are doing quite well. So you see, it is my limited view of things that determines why I shoot the way I shoot.  If I lived in New York city and everyone was shooting candids and they were making a good living at it, I would start shooting more candids.  But I live in a little conservative bible belt town of 10,000 and people here like what I and all the others shoot, so that is my market.  You shoot your market, I will shoot mine.  I will use or abuse the rules, you can do likewise if you want.

Mr. Ho


----------



## Alison

Tally Ho said:
			
		

> All were candid shooters, none took the time to learn the rules, or pose or light their subjects well, they just fired away, hoping for one good image out of several hundred.



Not all people who shoot "candids" are un-educated on lighting or how to work with their clients. It sounds like the people in your area rushed into a business without having skill. Quite different from having skill and developnig a business around it. I have had quite the opposite experience here in my state. Clients come to me because they want something more natural looking than a very formal, posed photo. Like Daniel said, knowing your market is key. If in your area people prefer posed photos by all means shoot to get customers. If I did that here my clients would dry up because it's not what they are looking for.

I'm sure that personal/cultural style influences critiques as well. If we're looking at what is popular in our respective markets we will see a portrait/photo differently. For my market I shoot for emotion. Doesn't mean I ignore lighting or posing, though I do limit posing for small children because it will quickly ruin a shoot to overdirect a 2 year old. Different styles doesn't make one better than the other, and looking at the variety of work here has helped me grow as a photograper and help me create images that my clients love. These same images that are popular in NH might flop in Indiana.


----------



## Hertz van Rental

Now that's much better.
If you had started off like that then there would not have been all this silliness and bad feeling.
There is nothing wrong with tailoring your style to your local market. If you make a living out of it, all well and good.
It's just that you need to remember that your area is not representative and different people in different places like different things.
There is no right way and no wrong way - only what works for you and what sells.
Putting your side of things in the way you have just done has gained you some respect - at least from me.


----------



## photogoddess

Ditto here! :mrgreen:


----------



## danalec99

Tally Ho said:
			
		

> Sorry, but here is what I see locally. A number of years ago a new photographer opened up a studio, learned the craft from the masters, but then after a few years decided he was not getting the 'rush' it once gave him, so he turned the studio over to his assistant. He didn't give her much in the way of photographic education because she was artistic and freewheeling and into candid portraits. She was 'up against' two master photographers in her county of 50,000, plus several other 'good' solid portraitists in a nearby county. She closed the business after three years. Does this happen all over? I would guess so, but don't know that for a fact.
> 
> I take from the above situation that people in my area like well posed, well executed, well lit portraits like they see in the windows of the established 'main street' photographers. Actually, in my nearly 25 years in this business, I have seen probably a dozen (or more) photographers come and go in my town of 10,000. Mere flashes in the pan. All were candid shooters, none took the time to learn the rules, or pose or light their subjects well, they just fired away, hoping for one good image out of several hundred. OTOH there are three established portrait photographers in my town, none are candid shooters (except at weddings) all have learned the rules, have learned that they can be broken sometimes and all are doing quite well. So you see, it is my limited view of things that determines why I shoot the way I shoot. If I lived in New York city and everyone was shooting candids and they were making a good living at it, I would start shooting more candids. But I live in a little conservative bible belt town of 10,000 and people here like what I and all the others shoot, so that is my market. You shoot your market, I will shoot mine. I will use or abuse the rules, you can do likewise if you want.
> 
> Mr. Ho


NOW we are talking! :cheer:
I have nothing more to add other than what Hertz just said. 

Have a beautiful evening!


----------



## danalec99

AlisonPower said:
			
		

> Not all people who shoot "candids" are un-educated on lighting or how to work with their clients.


Yup.

A nice share of photographers at WPJA have solid experience with newspapers, wire agencies, advertising etc.


----------



## elsaspet

:cheers:


----------



## Sharkbait

danalec99 said:
			
		

> Yup.
> 
> A nice share of photographers at WPJA have solid experience with newspapers, wire agencies, advertising etc.



I submitted my site for the wpja, but haven't heard back from them...guess I didn't make the cut.


----------



## Jeff Canes

[font=&quot]Personally, I do shoot candids because I am un-educated on lighting[/font]


----------



## Xmetal

In all the time i've been here on this nice forum filled with nice loving people....i've never seen such an anti-social thread. Well done kids.


----------



## deb

I can't believe I read the whole thing!


----------



## danalec99

Sharkbait said:
			
		

> I submitted my site for the wpja, but haven't heard back from them...guess I didn't make the cut.


I would assume they would get back to you either ways. A 'I was wondering...' email may not be a bad idea.


----------



## elsaspet

I went over to that site and looked, and dang, there is some fantastic stuff there!!!!!


----------



## ksmattfish

thebeginning said:
			
		

> another hilarious thread. it is threads like these that keep me coming back to TPF.



It's threads like these that make me realize I'm wasting my time here.


----------



## Sharkbait

ksmattfish said:
			
		

> It's threads like these that make me realize I'm wasting my time here.



Nah, you're not.  There are those of us who really value your opinion (even if it's bitter medicine sometimes.)   :thumbsup:


----------



## Nikon Fan

Just happened upon this thread this morning, read the whole thing, and you guys are hilarious!!! Thanks for a good laugh  

Just curious Tally Ho...where are you located?


----------



## ShutteredEye

LMAO!!  How come noone posted about the rumble in P&W???  

In on page 3!!!


----------



## thebeginning

ahhh glad that that's settled.  but not really.  it was entertaining while it lasted.  


we should have a debate section...


----------

