# Biggest pet peeve with photos?



## blackrose89 (Jan 2, 2012)

Is there any particular flaw you see in photos that just rubs you the wrong way? Even if you're guilty of it yourself, something you just can't stand to in a photo?


----------



## DCMoney (Jan 2, 2012)

unintended blurriness


----------



## blackrose89 (Jan 2, 2012)

For me it is tilted horizons, I don't know why, just something about it rubs me the wrong way lol.


----------



## analog.universe (Jan 2, 2012)

Tilted horizons are really high on the list...  probably not as bad as overexposed pop-up flash for me though.


----------



## jake337 (Jan 2, 2012)

Duck lips that were not meant to be funny.....


----------



## jowensphoto (Jan 2, 2012)

As far as SOOC goes, I'm with you on tilted hoizons. Unless it's intentional, but rarely does that work.

Which leads me to my second pet peeve.

For photos that have had some PP work done, I can't stand selective coloring. It's usually horrible. Looking at my flickr, I'm guilty of it. But I've learned from that and haven't been tempted in over a year lol.


----------



## jterry85 (Jan 2, 2012)

Tilted anything bothers me! When I was taking photos on my Paris trip it seemed like every photo I took was crooked but it turned out that was just my eyes.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jan 2, 2012)

Newbies starting new threads every thirty minutes?

Oh, wait, that wasn't the question.  I guess, my biggest pet peave would be photos that are out of focus, under exposed, and blurry because the photographer was told that getting a 50mm 1.8 prime would magically fix their issues. For me, it's just annoying because I went that route, realized the advice was bad, added flash, and can now do everything I wanted to do.

A flash is, by far, the best investment somebody can make, but generally, it's the last thing people choose to purchase.  Makes no sense to me.  Not sure why people choose to make their own mistakes instead of learning from others'.


----------



## sm4him (Jan 2, 2012)

Well, the thing that really ANNOYS me most about my OWN photos is usually not getting the focus spot-on. Can't really say it's what I *notice* the most, since if I noticed it, I'd fix it, lol.  My vision problems just make it really tough for me to know for sure if my focus is okay until someone else looks at the photo.

Pet peeve, as far as a "flaw?" (in other words, not something someone did purposely like selective color or way overcook an HDR)
Probably not paying attention to your background, and ending up with a tree or sign post growing out of someone's head.


----------



## jake337 (Jan 2, 2012)

jterry85 said:


> Tilted anything bothers me! When I was taking photos on my Paris trip it seemed like every photo I took was crooked but it turned out that was just my eyes.



Depends on the subject for me.  I really don't mind tilts in any candid kids shots.  It can add a mischievous feeling to it.


When straightened out, they just didn't work for me.


----------



## jake337 (Jan 2, 2012)

Kerbouchard said:


> Newbies starting new threads every thirty minutes?
> 
> Oh, wait, that wasn't the question. I guess, my biggest pet peave would be photos that are out of focus, under exposed, and blurry because the photographer was told that getting a 50mm 1.8 prime would magically fix their issues. For me, it's just annoying because I went that route, realized the advice was bad, added flash, and can now do everything I wanted to do.
> 
> A flash is, by far, the best investment somebody can make, but generally, it's the last thing people choose to purchase. Makes no sense to me. Not sure why people choose to make their own mistakes instead of learning from others'.



+1


----------



## unpopular (Jan 2, 2012)

Photos of half dome. You know the ones.


----------



## analog.universe (Jan 2, 2012)

unpopular said:


> Photos of half dome. You know the ones.



haha!  : )
so true...


----------



## WesternGuy (Jan 2, 2012)

I'm with the rest who "voted" for tilted horizons - just as bad, for me, are images where the horizons cut the image in half - ouch :thumbdown:.  
My 0.02¢ FWIW.

Cheers,

WesternGuy


----------



## gsgary (Jan 2, 2012)

Kerbouchard said:


> Newbies starting new threads every thirty minutes?
> 
> Oh, wait, that wasn't the question.  I guess, my biggest pet peave would be photos that are out of focus, under exposed, and blurry because the photographer was told that getting a 50mm 1.8 prime would magically fix their issues. For me, it's just annoying because I went that route, realized the advice was bad, added flash, and can now do everything I wanted to do.
> 
> A flash is, by far, the best investment somebody can make, but generally, it's the last thing people choose to purchase.  Makes no sense to me.  Not sure why people choose to make their own mistakes instead of learning from others'.




Do you mean the ones with 5 active posts


----------



## ann (Jan 2, 2012)

dead center   dead boring


----------



## c.cloudwalker (Jan 2, 2012)

ann said:


> dead center   dead boring



:lmao:

How about just plain dead boring for everyone except the shooter?


----------



## unpopular (Jan 2, 2012)

Oh. That's another one. Compositional rules like never centering the frame or horizon; the rule of thirds in general.


----------



## c.cloudwalker (Jan 2, 2012)

unpopular said:


> Oh. That's another one. Compositional rules like never centering the frame or horizon; the rule of thirds in general.



Never say never. There is a time for everything and a thing for every time.


----------



## snowbear (Jan 2, 2012)

Ignoring the basics and overdone "trendy" techniques that add nothing positive to the photo.


----------



## KmH (Jan 2, 2012)

Photos that have 97.6% of the frame blurry from very shallow DoF because the photographer was to far from, and used the wrong framing for, a photo. :lmao:

That &#8593;, and ****ty light.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jan 2, 2012)

KmH said:


> Photos that have 97.6% of the frame blurry from very shallow DoF because the photographer was to far from, and used the wrong framing for, a photo. :lmao:
> 
> That &#8593;, and ****ty light.


Shallow DOF is not caused by being too far from the subject.  Adding distance to the subject actually increases DOF.  

Perhaps, you should stick to correcting people's grammar rather than commenting on photography?


----------



## c.cloudwalker (Jan 2, 2012)

How about noobs who ask the same old, same old stupid questions?


----------



## Dominantly (Jan 2, 2012)

Blue/green colocasts Too much yellow in grass Bad selective coloringOver saturation in PPEyes not in focus w/portraits


----------



## unpopular (Jan 2, 2012)

Dominantly said:


> Bad selective coloring



Is tehre such a thing as "good" selective coloring?


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jan 2, 2012)

unpopular said:


> Dominantly said:
> 
> 
> > Bad selective coloring
> ...



Yes.  It's just never happened on this forum.


----------



## Ron Evers (Jan 2, 2012)

sm4him said:


> Probably not paying attention to your background, and ending up with a tree or sign post growing out of someone's head.



As in your avatar?  


As an ex surveyor tilted horizons or out of plumb verticals put me off the most.


----------



## blackrose89 (Jan 2, 2012)

Another one I find to be a pretty common mistake is how all close-up and insect photos are classified as macro. When I first got started, I thought that macro was merely insect and water drop photography. It wasn't until ONE person corrected me maybe a week into my photography and showed me what true macro is. If that person hadn't corrected me(although I'll be learning in school later) I wouldn't have known and probably still wouldn't because its very hard to find anyone that says different.


----------



## unpopular (Jan 2, 2012)

blackrose89 said:


> When I first got started



lol.


----------



## blackrose89 (Jan 2, 2012)

unpopular said:


> blackrose89 said:
> 
> 
> > When I first got started
> ...



I know I'm still new, but I didn't "just get started" I was referring to my first few days.


----------



## Tee (Jan 2, 2012)

When a poster starts a thread asking for C&C and in the intro post says, "I know this isn't the best.  It's out of focus, overexposed, I totally didn't see the light pole sticking out of the head, etc" and begins to explain why it's a crappy post and then says, "Tell me what you think.  K, thnx".  I don't understand why people post images that they themselves know are crap.  Shouldn't they post what they think is their best and ask for C&C?


----------



## unpopular (Jan 2, 2012)

blackrose89 said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > blackrose89 said:
> ...




How long exactly have you been at this?


----------



## Vtec44 (Jan 2, 2012)

In order of importance when I judge my own photos, at least in my humble opinion.

1. *Focus *- If I can't get sharp at 100% zoom, it bugs the hell out of me.  It reflects on me as a photographer since my equipment is more than capable.

2. *Exposure *- This bugs me too, but fixable to a certain extend in post process but I have to get really close so I don't spend too much time after.  Blown highlights on the face is probably the worse.

3. *Composition *- I hate it when I accidentally crop someone's fingers, toes, ears, etc.  I should catch those instantly before pressing the shutter button.

4. *Background *- I should also catch any distracting background items like cars, trash cans, people, pets, etc before pressing the shutter button.

5. *Noise *- There isn't much you can do under certain situations but at 100% zoom, it bugs me too but I can live with a noisy photograph.  Then again, there's always B/W conversion! lol


----------



## blackrose89 (Jan 2, 2012)

unpopular said:


> blackrose89 said:
> 
> 
> > unpopular said:
> ...



A few months. Yep, still a baby.


----------



## blackrose89 (Jan 2, 2012)

Tee said:


> When a poster starts a thread asking for C&C and in the intro post says, "I know this isn't the best. It's out of focus, overexposed, I totally didn't see the light pole sticking out of the head, etc" and begins to explain why it's a crappy post and then says, "Tell me what you think. K, thnx". I don't understand why people post images that they themselves know are crap. Shouldn't they post what they think is their best and ask for C&C?



I have to disagree with this one. Just because someone does this does't neccessarily mean they don't think it's a good photo, just means they are trying to be objective of their photos and noticing the flaws to watch out for next time. When people get started (me being one of them) there will be flaws, what's wrong with owning up to it rather then thinking they're on point?


----------



## unpopular (Jan 2, 2012)

Vtec44 said:


> 5. Noise - There isn't much you can do under certain situations but at 100% zoom, it bugs me too but I can live with a noisy photograph. Then again, there's always B/W conversion! lol




A proper exposure of moderate ISO (camera relative) noise should never be so extreme that it is distracting. This doesn't mean noise will not be present.




blackrose89 said:


> A few months. Yep, still a baby.




When my brother was four or so, he used to say "I have not done this in YEARS!" 


Just having fun with ya, Rose


----------



## Vtec44 (Jan 2, 2012)

unpopular said:


> A proper exposure of moderate ISO (camera relative) noise should never be so extreme that it is distracting. This doesn't mean noise will not be present.



Yeah underexposed photographs tend to have more noise when you try to bring to the correct exposure. Hence, I gotta get as close to the proper exposure as possible before post process.  The one I typically hate is high ISO noise, even with a fast f/1.8 lens but no flash.   I'm envious with the FF camera owners but hey you gotta use what you have.  lol


----------



## unpopular (Jan 2, 2012)

Delta 400 was good enough then, ISO 400 is good enough now, gabnabbit!!! GET OFF MY LAWN!

--

I'm a huge believer in exposure to the right, many of my images are exposed quite far from the intended result.

But even slightly too dark will result in a mess of noise. It's always better to be slightly too bright than too dark, provided that nothing gets clipped.


----------



## KmH (Jan 2, 2012)

Kerbouchard said:


> Shallow DOF is not caused by being too far from the subject.  Adding distance to the subject actually increases DOF.
> 
> Perhaps, you should stick to correcting people's grammar rather than commenting on photography?


Obviously, your animosity towards me prevents you from getting  :lmao: .

It's to bad so few of us try to maintain high standards when it comes to written communication. I have never claimed to be perfect, and frequently edit typos, spelling, and grammar errors in my posts. So I at least try.


----------



## Tee (Jan 2, 2012)

blackrose89 said:


> I have to disagree with this one. Just because someone does this does't neccessarily mean they don't think it's a good photo, just means they are trying to be objective of their photos and noticing the flaws to watch out for next time. When people get started (me being one of them) there will be flaws, what's wrong with owning up to it rather then thinking they're on point?



So if the OP has already diagnosed their images, what's the point of starting a thread asking for C&C?  To boost their post count?  Now if someone starts a thread acknowledging they have a poor image but doesn't know how to correct what they're doing and lists their settings asking for help then that's a different story.  I'm talking about those who start a thread with "Hey, I know this is a piss poor image because X,Y &Z - what do you all think?" kind of threads.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jan 2, 2012)

KmH said:


> Kerbouchard said:
> 
> 
> > Shallow DOF is not caused by being too far from the subject.  Adding distance to the subject actually increases DOF.
> ...



You misspelled grammar...You also misused the word 'to'.  Thanks for trying, though.


----------



## Robin Usagani (Jan 2, 2012)

Kerbouchard said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > Kerbouchard said:
> ...


----------



## unpopular (Jan 2, 2012)

FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!


----------



## RDTague_Studios (Jan 2, 2012)

Things growing out of subjects heads! I mean, c'mon, your feet are attached to your body, use them and take a step to the right or left!


----------



## KmH (Jan 2, 2012)

Kerbouchard said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > Kerbouchard said:
> ...


Thanks. I edited my post and corrected my spelling error.


----------



## unpopular (Jan 2, 2012)

RDTague_Studios said:


> Things growing out of subjects heads!



You mean like this?






(_Medusa _(1887), Arnold Böcklin. ret. from The Arnold Böcklin Pages - Medusa)


----------



## sm4him (Jan 2, 2012)

Ron Evers said:


> sm4him said:
> 
> 
> > Probably not paying attention to your background, and ending up with a tree or sign post growing out of someone's head.
> ...



 EXACTLY like that, lol. That's always irritated me to no end about that picture...but on the other hand, it is one of about 3 pictures taken of me over the last 10 years that I can even stand to look at, so I just use it anyway.  I suppose I could photoshop that out of there, but that would take effort.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jan 2, 2012)

KmH said:


> Kerbouchard said:
> 
> 
> > KmH said:
> ...




'Too', in the context that you used it, should have two o's.

As far as animosity, I have none...but when most of your posts revolve around grammar or copyright, you should at least get it right.  It is only two subjects.  If you are going to harp on them, you might as well master them.  Honestly, it's not that complicated.


----------



## KmH (Jan 2, 2012)

Keep it factual. Most of my posts don't deal with grammar, or copyright.

I disagree that 'too' was the proper form of to for the context I used it in, which is why I didn't change it.


----------



## rexbobcat (Jan 2, 2012)

Overly smoothed portraits.
People do not resemble wax.


----------



## blackrose89 (Jan 2, 2012)

"too" is correct because you're stating in terms of an amount not a relationship.


----------



## rexbobcat (Jan 2, 2012)

KmH said:


> Keep it factual. Most of my posts don't deal with grammar, or copyright.
> 
> I disagree that 'too' was the proper form of to for the context I used it in, which is why I didn't change it.



I'm sorry. I don't mean to get in on this beef, but the grammar nazi in me can't help it. 

"It's to bad so few of us try to maintain high standards..."

The first 'to' needs to be 'too', because it expresses something excessive, such as "too much."

The second 'to' is correct, because it does not communicate the meaning of also/besides, or something in excess. 

I'm sorry.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jan 2, 2012)

KmH said:


> Keep it factual. Most of my posts don't deal with grammar, or copyright.
> 
> I disagree that 'too' was the proper form of to for the context I used it in, which is why I didn't change it.



I have rarely seen a post from you that doesn't deal with grammar, copyright, forum rules, or you selling something and I've been seeing your posts for a few years now.  Occasionally, you will offer some decent advice, but you are fooling yourself if you don't realize that most of your posts are as I described.

In any case, you are wrong about the word 'to'.  To vs. Too - Education Bug


----------



## Natalie (Jan 2, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > Keep it factual. Most of my posts don't deal with grammar, or copyright.
> ...


LOL, irony?

The thing that annoys me most about _my own_ photographs is when I think I got the perfect shot of an animal, but then get it home and find that the eye is out of focus. Happens all the time and I hate it, hate it, hate it! About other people's photographs, all the standard stuff, like tilted horizons, airbrushed (fake-looking) skin in portraits, etc.


----------



## RDTague_Studios (Jan 2, 2012)

unpopular said:


> RDTague_Studios said:
> 
> 
> > Things growing out of subjects heads!
> ...




Yep...that too!


----------



## Joel_W (Jan 2, 2012)

My biggest pet peeve is with my own inability to slow down during a shoot, and concentrate on the basics. I usually work with my camera on a tripod as my subjects don't move very much.  I prefer to use my LCD screen over the viewfinder, so I get a larger overall view of what I'm trying to capture. Yet, many times I just miss things in the background that ruin the shot.  I guess you can say that it's my inability to stay totally focused is my biggest enemy.


----------



## rexbobcat (Jan 2, 2012)

Natalie said:


> rexbobcat said:
> 
> 
> > KmH said:
> ...



Yeah I know, right? I just noticed it. :lmao:


----------



## Foxx (Jan 2, 2012)

Not with photos in particular, but of people taking photos. It annoys me considerably when I see people with full auto on their P&S and taking photos of buildings/lanscapes and the flash goes off. THE FLASH. 

This kills me even more when its someone with a DSLR. I just want to rage.


----------



## TenaciousTins (Jan 2, 2012)

I HATE noise. Even intentional noise. VERY few pictures that have intentional noise have caught my eye and made me think they were nice. And on the opposite end of that spectrum, I hate overly smooth pictures. Like someone else said...people do not resemble wax...LOL! 

I also don't like tilted horizons but when it's very slight I hardly notice.

But I realllly realllly hate noise.


----------



## ernestlsmith (Jan 2, 2012)

I hate when my pictures come out blurry. Anything else most of the time i can fix with photoshop.Also Framing photos the wrong way


----------



## greenjackson16 (Jan 2, 2012)

Facebook photo quality pisses me off, even though alot of people still like my photos I'll always know that the quality is horrible


----------



## ernestlsmith (Jan 2, 2012)

I hate noise too .what do you do to get rid of it when your shooting Tenacious


----------



## MissCream (Jan 2, 2012)

A little late but most of this thread reminded me of this.


----------



## Natalie (Jan 2, 2012)

greenjackson16 said:


> Facebook photo quality pisses me off, even though alot of people still like my photos I'll always know that the quality is horrible


To add to that, Photobucket-quality photos! I absolutely hate seeing perfectly good photographs ruined by Photobucket's *terrible* compression. No photographers who care about the way their photos look should host anything on that site! Use Flickr, they use a much better method of compression than Photobucket, so the images still look vibrant and crisp even when they are resized and posted on a forum. Here's the proof, the exact same photo hosted on my Photobucket account (which I used to use a few years ago) and on my Flickr account...

Photobucket:





Flickr:




See the difference when they're right next to each other? Photobucket's compression makes the image look dull and blurry, like my lens was dirty or I misfocused. Switch now! Photographers have no excuse! 

PS: Also, Flickr lets you keep the rights to your image, which apparently Photobucket doesn't.


----------



## blackrose89 (Jan 2, 2012)

greenjackson16 said:


> Facebook photo quality pisses me off, even though alot of people still like my photos I'll always know that the quality is horrible


 Yes! Facebook seriously downgrades the photos. So does photobucket. Flickr is better, but adds noise to the photos.


----------



## MissCream (Jan 2, 2012)

MissCream said:


> A little late but most of this thread reminded me of this.



P.S. I actually like a little noise if done in the right setting...

P.S.S. Not sure what happened and why I quoted this but I blame it on just getting my nails done...


----------



## unpopular (Jan 2, 2012)

Rebecca - I am the Copyright Nazi. Please show your papers.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Jan 2, 2012)

blackrose89 said:


> greenjackson16 said:
> 
> 
> > Facebook photo quality pisses me off, even though alot of people still like my photos I'll always know that the quality is horrible
> ...



Flickr doesn't add noise to images. That's absurd. You must doing it wrong!


----------



## Joel_W (Jan 2, 2012)

Natalie said:


> greenjackson16 said:
> 
> 
> > Facebook photo quality pisses me off, even though alot of people still like my photos I'll always know that the quality is horrible
> ...



Natalie, your point is well taken. I took your advice when I 1st joined  TPF, and was using Photobucket as my host service. I switched to Flickr on your advice, and the results were truly dramatic.  Thanks again.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 2, 2012)

unpopular said:


> Photos of half dome. You know the ones.


 

Followed by photos from Antelope Canyon. You know the chamber.


----------



## MissCream (Jan 2, 2012)

unpopular said:


> Rebecca - I am the Copyright Nazi. Please show your papers.



I got it off thechive.com that means it's free to use right?


----------



## Dominantly (Jan 3, 2012)

Some of you are classically trained in the art of buffoonery.


----------



## ManhattanShutterBug (Jan 3, 2012)

Cheesy sayings and bad photoshop effects. Titled anything. Bad composition.  Pop up flask look.


----------



## rexbobcat (Jan 3, 2012)

Dominantly said:


> Some of you are classically trained in the art of buffoonery.



Well it's nice to know that I'm classically trained in something.


----------



## unpopular (Jan 3, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> Dominantly said:
> 
> 
> > Some of you are classically trained in the art of buffoonery.
> ...



For some reason this reminds me of what my wife says when people ask her where she wants to go to law school: Barnum and Bailey's School of Law. 

Because everyone know the legal system is a circus anyway!


----------



## j-digg (Jan 3, 2012)

Like others - Slightly tilted horizons.. from a fraction of a degree to several... if you shoot when youre drunk, at least wait until you sober up to do your PP.

Cheeeeeeeeesy engagement photos - hand hearts..Ive even seen an arm heart shadow.... chalk boards and the now over done "feet shot".

Same with maternity - terribly cheesy stuff.. cant think of any off hand but they can be downright painful.


----------



## Kbarredo (Jan 3, 2012)

when you take pics of buildings that arent level with the horizon. So either the horizon or the building has to be crooked


----------



## ann (Jan 3, 2012)

Derrel said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > Photos of half dome. You know the ones.
> ...



How could I have forgotten this shot, drives me nuts.

There is a photo all over the internet of an old lady in Havana smoking a cigar. Believe me, I avoided her like the plague. just as I would Antelope Canyon.


----------



## enzodm (Jan 3, 2012)

A vote for tilted horizons, because it's the easiest to repair issue. Noise is a non issue most of time: instead I started bothering pixel peepers, included me  .


----------



## ph0enix (Jan 3, 2012)

Tee said:


> When a poster starts a thread asking for C&C and in the intro post says, "I know this isn't the best.  It's out of focus, overexposed, I totally didn't see the light pole sticking out of the head, etc" and begins to explain why it's a crappy post and then says, "Tell me what you think.  K, thnx".  I don't understand why people post images that they themselves know are crap.  Shouldn't they post what they think is their best and ask for C&C?



This is my #1 pet peeve as well.  If you didn't take the time to make your photo(s) look presentable and think it's crap, I don't want to see it and waste my time on it either.


----------



## JH100 (Jan 3, 2012)

Spot coloring/selective coloring. I've disliked it from the start.


----------



## DCMoney (Jan 3, 2012)

Joel_W said:


> Natalie said:
> 
> 
> > greenjackson16 said:
> ...



well damn, I've been using photobucket for years! But after seeing your comparison im moving over to flicker!


----------



## etnad0 (Jan 3, 2012)

KmH said:


> Keep it factual. Most of my posts don't deal with grammar, or copyright.
> 
> I disagree that 'too' was the proper form of to for the context I used it in, which is why I didn't change it.



Not to get involved but he/she is right. It's supposed to be "too" and not "to". I have OCD when it comes to spelling even though I make my mistakes as well. Something that bothers me personally is the use of "their, they're, and there"... I can overlook the "to or too, but not two" used in the wrong context.


----------



## unpopular (Jan 3, 2012)

"When the going gets tough, the tough get Strunk and White!"


----------



## MissCream (Jan 3, 2012)

I also hate heart hands...


----------



## unpopular (Jan 3, 2012)

A heart-shaped shadow of a wedding band in a bible is just as bad, if not worse.


----------



## Natalie (Jan 3, 2012)

DCMoney said:


> Joel_W said:
> 
> 
> > Natalie said:
> ...


Welcome to the dark side.


----------



## Ron Evers (Jan 3, 2012)

I use photobucket & have no issues as I resize to 800 on the long side before uploading.


----------



## IByte (Jan 3, 2012)

My personal pet peeve is when Noobs or Newbs (whichever you prefer) ask the same questions without researching previous posts.  There is so much information for beginners out there that questions like "What lens to buy?", or "What camera should I get? is not only annoying to seasoned photographers on this forum, but giving beginners a bad rap.  As a beginner myself, I've read so many threads on this forum, watched many videos of the foundations of photography, and browsed around the net that I went to a local retailer "felt" the camera in my hands and thought what kind of pictures do I want to invest my time, and what lenses will I need to accomplish that goal.  As more people are asking the above questions, it's becoming harder for who have been here a long time to separate the people who want everything to handed to them vs. the people who want to really explore what this hobby, or future profession has to offer.


----------



## unpopular (Jan 3, 2012)

What exactly is Av mode and how does it differ from when I just use the flash?


----------



## Geaux (Jan 3, 2012)

-Dirty food/drool/snot faces on children (Moms = GUILTY)
-Yellow white balance on long exposure night shots (easy fix, so why not fix it)
-Over baked HDR's!


----------



## unpopular (Jan 3, 2012)

Geaux said:


> -Dirty food/drool/snot faces on children (Moms = GUILTY)



MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAAAAA


----------



## JH100 (Jan 3, 2012)

IByte said:
			
		

> My personal pet peeve is when Noobs or Newbs (whichever you prefer) ask the same questions without researching previous posts.  There is so much information for beginners out there that questions like "What lens to buy?", or "What camera should I get?&#148; is not only annoying to seasoned photographers on this forum, but giving beginners a bad rap.  As a beginner myself, I've read so many threads on this forum, watched many videos of the foundations of photography, and browsed around the net that I went to a local retailer "felt" the camera in my hands and thought what kind of pictures do I want to invest my time, and what lenses will I need to accomplish that goal.  As more people are asking the above questions, it's becoming harder for who have been here a long time to separate the people who want everything to handed to them vs. the people who want to really explore what this hobby, or future profession has to offer.



I have experience with this kind of. I visit the Photography section on Yahoo! Answers in addition to TPF to pick up tips from things people ask and the amount of people who ask "what camera should i buy/what is a good dslr for a beginner photographer" insane. I'm  talking often several times a day insane. It makes me wonder why it doesn't occur to them to at least search for previous questions on Y!A before asking.


----------



## MissCream (Jan 3, 2012)

unpopular said:


> Geaux said:
> 
> 
> > -Dirty food/drool/snot faces on children (Moms = GUILTY)
> ...



Agreed.


----------



## unpopular (Jan 3, 2012)

lol, rebecca - who exactly are you agreeing with?!


----------



## MissCream (Jan 3, 2012)

Lol you!

Wait. I'm not sure what I agreed to.


----------



## unpopular (Jan 3, 2012)

lol, that's why I was confused!

SMART ARSES UNITE!


----------



## MissCream (Jan 3, 2012)

unpopular said:


> lol, that's why I was confused!
> 
> SMART ARSES UNITE!



I've been drinking rum and Chiving (theCHIVE - Funny Photos and Funny Videos &#8211; Keep Calm and Chive On) all night. My brain has.been.fried.


----------

