# photography pet peaves



## Jus7 A Phas3

What are they? Mine are when people stand in the way of me trying to take a picture and skateres telling me what do and they get mad at when i dont get a good picture them when its their fault. What are yours?


----------



## Emerana

this could get a little feisty but I will share mine

I have a couple.  
1) I have two kids and never have time away from them so I have to work my photography in or wait until I have help.  I have noticed other moms at places like the zoo, also hobbyist photographers totally ignoring their kids for the "shot".  Once a woman was taking photos of a sea lion show and instead of watching her children, she pushed her son over to where we were, he got in front of my daughter and kept kicking her.  She was in a stroller, only 1 year old.  I had to ask his father and mother 3 times to please keep him from climbing in front of her and kicking her.  It did serve to remind me that when I am in places for them, to forget the photography unless it is of them enjoying themselves.

2) is petty.  I just hate it when I have set up a shot and people with the dinky p*s cameras step in front and start firing off their little flashes ruining my photo or making me wait.  Esp. when I know their photo isn't going to turn out


----------



## Jus7 A Phas3

Jeez thats some mean parents,


----------



## John_Olexa

The turm.. " Photog"   uke-rig:


----------



## waileong

"No Photography Allowed"


----------



## THORHAMMER

anyone in a car that says "patrol" on the side or has amber lights not red and blue. 

seriously do you think im going to listen to you, just stay in bed...


----------



## JerryPH

I go out of my way to respect ANY person holding a camera up to take the shot, but it burns me when someone walks in front of me without caring even after they SEE ME.

I thank them for the courtesy and try agian.

I once "thanked" a miss prissy 3 times before her husband physically pulled her aside, apologized to me and told her to stop being a *****... lol.

I sincerely thanked him for his courtesy and smiled, but made no more of it than that.  I took my shot quickly and moved on.


----------



## Phranquey

Oh, this is a prime one for me. I just _love _it when someone comes up to me, comments on my equipment, and then has the nerve to say "It must be nice to have that kind of money to throw around"....

I've been into photography for almost 22 years now, and it has taken a long time to work my way up to what I have. I started off with a Minolta X370 and some crap lenses in high school (oops, just gave my age), and upgraded when possible.

I now have a very good job, and can enjoy a few finer things, but I'm no Bill Gates by any means. Just want to smack some people....


----------



## Rhys

My pet peeve - places where I'm not allowed to take my camera or not allowed to defend myself.


----------



## cactus waltz

Selective coloring is mine.


----------



## Battou

Power lines and cables


----------



## LaFoto

How about silly photo lab workers who apparently don't know what exactly they do, Battou??? I thought they were among your personal photography peeves! They sure belong to mine! When they eat their sandwiches and handle film all at the same time................................... :roll:


----------



## Battou

LaFoto said:


> How about silly photo lab workers who apparently don't know what exactly they do, Battou??? I thought they were among your personal photography peeves! They sure belong to mine! When they eat their sandwiches and handle film all at the same time................................... :roll:



Yes they are one of the higest ranking peeves of mine, but the power lines top the cake because I can threaten them all I like and they won't do a thing. :lmao:

I take it you had a bad experiance reasently?


----------



## Garbz

Expanding on LaFoto's: People who are not qualified. That is to develop film, print digital prints, or even sell cameras. How about those people who tell you flat out that some gear isn't compatible with your gear even though you know it is.


----------



## LaFoto

Well, not really that bad, Battou, as I made it sound, and the "eat their sandwiches while they handle my film" thing is actually something my sister once said, only did I put a fat cross on the cheapest, smallest prints to be had when I had my latest film developed (just so I could only see what I had got, could always order larger sizes on better paper later), and then they used the one-size bigger paper size, on their premium paper, printed all 36 photos, but declared the container had been damaged and most suffered from light leakage. But I had to pay for all the bad ones, too, and the high price. Grrr. (I could have returned the pics, waited for another week, and get back my cheap ones, but ... what the hxxx - but what annoys me is that they actually RELY on this, their customer's, reaction...)


----------



## Battou

LaFoto said:


> Well, not really that bad, Battou, as I made it sound, and the "eat their sandwiches while they handle my film" thing is actually something my sister once said, only did I put a fat cross on the cheapest, smallest prints to be had when I had my latest film developed (just so I could only see what I had got, could always order larger sizes on better paper later), and then they used the one-size bigger paper size, on their premium paper, printed all 36 photos, but declared the container had been damaged and most suffered from light leakage. But I had to pay for all the bad ones, too, and the high price. Grrr. (I could have returned the pics, waited for another week, and get back my cheap ones, but ... what the hxxx - but what annoys me is that they actually RELY on this, their customer's, reaction...)



Ah yes, I had a similar yet opposit occurance with my parking issues photos, when I got them back they where damaged beyond anything I had ever seen, this includes my own rookie mistakes as well as those of others during my photography classes. I too could have sent them back and waited another week, however I absolutely needed those photos on the NOW basis and could not do that. I had ordered doubles to boot. I ended up having the stores manager call them and rip into the labs manager, it's all I could do.

I have also had occations where they have run my images threw their "perfect touch" process costing me an additional couple dollars and making me have to do a crapload of work to remove the two layers of film they put over the negs before I could scan them. 

Oh yeah, here is a prime example of why the powerline takes the cake too.


----------



## plentygood

cactus waltz said:


> Selective coloring is mine.


 
:thumbup:

It can be done really well (usually when it's more subtle), but I'd say 90% of the time it looks harsh and tacky.


----------



## usayit

In general, People who interrupt my creativity with their banter....  

Kinda like interrupting a conversation or listening in on a conversation.  Even worse... people who interrupt me to talk about equipment.  Its the same group that usually get into a  contest over equipment.

I'm usually pretty good at maintaining my composure and not come off as angry.  I have convinced myself that I might be standing there silently for a few moments just thinking about the next step and that could be interpreted as a good time to spark conversation.  

My other pet peeves...

Non-constructive critiques....  we are all learning and if someone doesn't want to contribute to the learning process they should just keep their comments to themselves.

The fact that our society is paranoid of individuals with cameras....  Sparks the "I'm not a pervert" syndrome in me.


----------



## Stranger

1) When people look at my camera and say "wow, that must have cost a lot. I bet IT takes some good pictures." After all the work ive put and am still putting into learning how to take good pictures has been a waste if i would have known there is a setting in the expensive camera for it....

2) In my galleries when i get 100 photo views and no comments -_-

3) When my favorite photo of the bunch (one i think is best) is the one least mentioned and the "snapshoot" looking photo gets the highest praise.


----------



## rmh159

When people use flash to try to light a subject that's 1/2 a mile away.

For example... in the US during the Superbowl when it's time for kick-off you see about 50,000 flashes fire.  You have to wonder how many of those people *really* think the flash does anything to help expose the field.


----------



## sabbath999

Hmmm.... photography pet peaves....

I have photographed pet dogs, pet cats, pet snakes, pet fish and even a pet pig... but I don't think I have ever photographed a pet peave...


----------



## JerryPH

rmh159 said:


> When people use flash to try to light a subject that's 1/2 a mile away.
> 
> For example... in the US during the Superbowl when it's time for kick-off you see about 50,000 flashes fire. You have to wonder how many of those people *really* think the flash does anything to help expose the field.


 
I don't know many stadiums where the kicker is a 1/2 mile away from the people... but think about it... 50,000 flashes all at once? I bet you a kid using a P&S with the lens cap on at the top row will get a perfectly exposed picture. :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

I did find it amusing when someone used flash during the day, though... until I learned that it WAS an advantage. Strike one for personal ignorance... lol


----------



## leila

sabbath999 said:


> Hmmm.... photography pet peaves....
> 
> I have photographed pet dogs, pet cats, pet snakes, pet fish and even a pet pig... but I don't think I have ever photographed a pet peave...




LOL :lmao:


----------



## Tiberius47

I've seen people taking flash photos of the moon.


----------



## mrodgers

rmh159 said:


> When people use flash to try to light a subject that's 1/2 a mile away.
> 
> For example... in the US during the Superbowl when it's time for kick-off you see about 50,000 flashes fire.  You have to wonder how many of those people *really* think the flash does anything to help expose the field.


I stated the exact same thing to my wife when we were watching the Superbowl.

I thought I already posted in this thread.  Is there a pet peeve in the off-topic section as well perhaps?

Anyways, my _photography_ pet peeve is people on this very forum, and other forums calling anything other than a dSLR, a point and shoot camera.  I definitely do not just point and shoot my camera.  Point and Shoot cameras are exactly that, no manual settings, or very limited settings.  You just point and shoot it.


----------



## Tennessee Landscape

Stranger said:


> 1) When people look at my camera and say "wow, that must have cost a lot. I bet IT takes some good pictures." After all the work ive put and am still putting into learning how to take good pictures has been a waste if i would have known there is a setting in the expensive camera for it....
> 
> 2)* In my galleries when i get 100 photo views and no comments* -_-
> 
> 3) When my favorite photo of the bunch (one i think is best) is the one least mentioned and the "snapshoot" looking photo gets the highest praise.


 

ummm.......ditto 




I have another one...

today I was shooting in Cades Cove ( National Park ) at hign noon, no clouds, sun burning my face.  I had my camera on a tripod and a guy asked me if I was doing long exposures.  WTF?


----------



## shorty6049

Tiberius47 said:


> I've seen people taking flash photos of the moon.


 
during that lunar eclipse a couple weeks ago, there was a lot of that going on at my school.....

my pet peeves, many of which have already been mentioned...

-"wow, you must have a really nice camera"
-people standing in front of your shot
-i dont like brand wars, (honestly) but i hate it when someone , for whatever reason, thinks that their brand is better than yours.  (almost like saying, "man, you should totally be using colgate toothpaste, its SO much better than crest!"   

- megapixels
-arrogant camera store employees


----------



## shorty6049

mrodgers said:


> I stated the exact same thing to my wife when we were watching the Superbowl.
> 
> I thought I already posted in this thread. Is there a pet peeve in the off-topic section as well perhaps?
> 
> Anyways, my _photography_ pet peeve is people on this very forum, and other forums calling anything other than a dSLR, a point and shoot camera. I definitely do not just point and shoot my camera. Point and Shoot cameras are exactly that, no manual settings, or very limited settings. You just point and shoot it.


 

what else WOULD you call it though? i dont think its meant to be demeaning or anythign to the people who use them. I consider a camera i had a couple years ago a point and shoot , even though it was probably the closest thing to a dSLR you could get... (all manual settings, 12X optical zoom, even the ability to attach a filter) . I think its just that the term "point and shoot" was coined before anything much better was really made yet in the field of non-dSLR digicams, so the name stuck.


----------



## Tennessee Landscape

shorty6049 said:


> what else WOULD you call it though? i dont think its meant to be demeaning or anythign to the people who use them. I consider a camera i had a couple years ago a point and shoot , even though it was probably the closest thing to a dSLR you could get... (all manual settings, 12X optical zoom, even the ability to attach a filter) . I think its just that the term "point and shoot" was coined before anything much better was really made yet in the field of non-dSLR digicams, so the name stuck.


 

That's actually called a prosumer, it's pretty much between a DSLR and a p&s


----------



## shorty6049

well, i think the line is getting blurry... you could consider a nikon d40, or a sony a200 prosumer these days, both are relatively affordable and more and more people are buying them and,  sadly, using them as point and shoots.....   but yeah, you're right on that, i just dont really think the word is all that common, and it almost sounds more like a level, instead of an actual title, becasue isnt a point and shoot, technically called a consumer camera then? and a nice dslr considered a professional camera?  liek how although nobody is SUPPOSED to call facial tissues Kleenex, pretty much everyone does anyway..


----------



## c_lawrence

> I've seen people taking flash photos of the moon.


 
I think I would actually laugh out loud! ... in fact, I just did! :lmao::lmao:

Just starting... don't really have any peaves yet, but I'm sure they'll show up soon enough


----------



## Emerana

Oh yeah I forgot...this is my number 1.  I share my photos with my friends and they say "what kind of camera do you have, it takes great photos".

grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

The camera takes lousy photos unless you know how to work it.  I have spent hundreds of hours..or more..studying photography at this point, taken thousands of photos...it isnt the camera, its *ME*


----------



## Iron Flatline

Leaving the lens cap on my Rangefinders.


----------



## domromer

Gearheads. People who want  to do nothing but explore the entire contents of your camera bag, compare it against theirs, then tell you all the fancy gear they plan on getting. Then look at you like your the jerk when they tell you all about how they can't wait to get a medium format digital back on their Rebel.


----------



## nicfargo

People who just don't understand what photography is all about.  It's about capturing emotions, moments, and beauty.  It's not about gear, money, or contests.  I say this and then I look at my signature...


----------



## Arch

wedding photographers who rely completely on PS Actions and never take the time to actually understand editing.... then charge 2-3k per wedding.


----------



## LaFoto

Well, newest "peeve" (since it happened today) is when I order all in all about 700 prints (don't ask me why), via online upload, and get three parcels in the mail today with ... 628 prints (or so) ... and 74 missing somewhere right in the middle. Grrr. 
Plus some prints have severe dog's ears. More grrr!

How am I going to put together my album until Thursday when there's 74 prints missing somewhere right in the middle???

Anyhow, deriving from my experience with lead to my ordering those approx 700 prints is another photography pet peeve of mine, and that is to see hundreds of parents take flash photography of their child dancing or singing on stage, after the person responsible for the show had expressly asked them NOT TO TAKE ANY PHOTOS, and there'd be photos to order later, taken by someone she specifically commissioned. (Me). But well, that's actually just me ranting a little. No serious peeve.


----------



## andrew99

I am loving this thread!  

Some of mine:  

- People assuming that because I have a DSLR, that it can magically take amazing, magazine quality pictures.
- Watching people with P&S camera's making silly mistakes like shooting people with the sun directly behind (with no flash) or using the flash when they shouldn't (shooting through glass, etc).
- Staff in photography stores who give false information
- The spiraling costs of getting into this hobby!  
- Dust on the lens or sensor
- The amount of time I now spend on the computer playing with photoshop and other image tweaking software!


----------



## Lyncca

Stranger said:


> 1) When people look at my camera and say "wow, that must have cost a lot. I bet IT takes some good pictures." After all the work ive put and am still putting into learning how to take good pictures has been a waste if i would have known there is a setting in the expensive camera for it....



Oh I hate that!  

I also hate the comments about wasting so much money on trivial hobbies
I want to say, "Hey moron! I don't have kids for a reason!"

(No bash on parents or kiddies intended, I happen to love kids.)


----------



## Emerana

I have kids and still spend a ton of money on trivial hobbies


----------



## Lyncca

Emerana said:


> I have kids and still spend a ton of money on trivial hobbies



Good for you!  My husband and I say we have too many expensive hobbies to have kids.   LOL  

Actually, let me rephrase that... HE has too many expensive hobbies.  I just have one! :mrgreen:


----------



## Tennessee Landscape

"random shots from the day....."


----------



## Emerana

Lyncca said:


> Good for you! My husband and I say we have too many expensive hobbies to have kids. LOL
> 
> Actually, let me rephrase that... HE has too many expensive hobbies. I just have one! :mrgreen:


 
LOL you could call my kids an expensive hobby too :lmao: kidding :mrgreen:


----------



## AspiringArchitect

Dust on my sensor
*Tilted horizons*....ive pointed out a few on here lately
Brand whores and wars
Cost of upgrading
"Photog"


----------



## skieur

Newbies who think that all their photos are art! :thumbdown:

skieur


----------



## dpolston

I've been waiting for a thread like this! I have a few (some have been mentioned)

I think my number one pet peeve are the people that discredit taking professional portraits and quality work (and you know the level of work I'm talking about) as "ppppfftttt... anybody can do take that!" General dismissal of everything we try to do like technique, DOF, rule of thirds, composition, lighting... the list goes on! I don't generally shoot "snapshots"!

Flashes in an arena or concert or any other very large venue. "Flashes do not work when your 600 feet away from the subject people!"

Camera hogs. When I shoot pj work (which is mostly what I do), I DO NOT shoot the kid or adult "macking it up" for the camera. I'll tell them flat out "If you pose for me, I will not shoot you!"

This is a mother in law thing: "Pa-tog-ra-pher" or "Pa-tog-ra-phy". It's Photographer (_Fo_-tog-rah-fur).

Another pet peeve is anybody with a camera can now be a "photographer". 90% of the people that call themselves "pro's", SUCK! Just because I own a pair of tennis shoes does not make me an athlete! 

<oh my god... my head hurts now just for thinking about this!>


----------



## LeftyRodriguez

rmh159 said:


> When people use flash to try to light a subject that's 1/2 a mile away.
> 
> For example... in the US during the Superbowl when it's time for kick-off you see about 50,000 flashes fire.  You have to wonder how many of those people *really* think the flash does anything to help expose the field.



My favorite was several years ago when I was flying from Dallas to Toronto for one of my many jaunts north of the border and this woman sitting next to me was trying to take pictures out of the plane's window with a disposable with the flash on.  Was it wrong of me not to point out that she'd just take 27 photos of flash glare?


----------



## AndersonPhoto

People and their flashes drive me nuts!  I, too, saw people taking pictures of the moon with their flash...  I ALWAYS see people taking pictures through glass with the flash.  People at hockey games with their flashes going off like crazy...  Yeah, I really don't cope with "Stupid Flash Syndrome"

I, too, often get the "Wow, that thing must take great pictures!" (they assume since my camera is big [5D], that it magically takes perfect photos every time...I WISH!!)

So many more, but I just don't have the energy to write them all out...lol


----------



## Emerana

skieur said:


> Newbies who think that all their photos are art! :thumbdown:
> 
> skieur


 
What a coincidence, cause one of my pet peeves is oldbies who think they are just so awesome and need to rip on newbies.

I guess I do have a newbie pet peeve though, I just think people rush to going pro really fast.  I have a little talent but couldn't imagine charging anyone money until I have at least a year of practice under my belt.  Not to rip on people who did this...its just me.  I don't want people giving me money until I know I can deliver consistent quality.  I will, however, take thank you gifts like haircuts, a little babysitting or a cake (from my baker friend).  But I want to thank them for allowing me the chance to shoot them of their kids.


----------



## Ajay

People who broadcast proudly that their (bad) image they've posted is straight out of the camera.  I've hardly ever seen a digital image that couldn't benefit from some post-processing in one way or another.


----------



## Battou

Ajay said:


> People who broadcast proudly that their (bad) image they've posted is straight out of the camera.  I've hardly ever seen a digital image that couldn't benefit from some post-processing in one way or another.



I do this, I'll admit it. Sometimes it's more for the "don't bother asking what I have done in Photoshop" aspect or "what should I do in PS" but in my case it is more to the fact I don't shop my pictures despite the fact I know they can and likely would benifit from it witch is what I think you are pointing to.


----------



## Ajay

Battou said:


> I do this, I'll admit it. Sometimes it's more for the "don't bother asking what I have done in Photoshop" aspect or "what should I do in PS" but in my case it is more to the fact I don't shop my pictures despite the fact I know they can and likely would benifit from it witch is what I think you are pointing to.


 
I don't mind it if the image is actually good, as all of yours that I've seen are. Sometimes, I admit, I get a little sad thinking back to my darkroom days and how important it was to get the image right in camera since there wasn't any pp that could be done besides burning/dodging.  I love the results I'm able to get now in PS, but I find myself liking the images I created in the darkroom more than anything I'm creating now.  They were so much more thought out.  

I fully respect and appreciate photographers such as yourself who choose not to pp their images.  I am not one of them right now because I am learning so much about photoshop and I'm getting so carried away experimenting and adjusting - then you click to see before and after and it's hard to go back to the before.


----------



## Battou

Completely unrelated to the above posts. 

I was checking the statistics for PL and it dawned on me one of my other very big pet peeves in photography. That is "Photoshop Abuse" I am not talking about any normal post processing work (hence it not being related to the above posts) I am talking about some utterly undesireable fanboyism imagery....You know the stuff.... sharinggahn eyes, hangin with InvaderZim and other such manips. Man I hate that crap, and I am an anime fanboy.


----------



## LaFoto

Actually, I don't really MIND people who use flash to cover hundreds of metres of space with a compact camera in-built flash. It is THEIR photo, they will get the results, and you won't believe HOW MANY there are who are later HAPPY with their results. Nothing to be seen, but they were there! And took a picture! Oh yes. 

But unless being asked, is it up to me to walk up towards them and say "This is not going to work"? OK, when it is family (my kids, nieces/nephews etc), and we are in a family setting of sorts, and I see one of them make a rookie mistake before they even take their photo, I will say, hang on, you might as well try it this way or that way.

But strangers photographing the plane window (blown out and totally blurred)? No ... let them do as they like.

But when TOLD, straight out, by someone, that photography (mostly so flash photography!) is not allowed, it grates on my nerves when people ignore this.

Though, truth be told: there's many there who actually just DO NOT KNOW how to switch OFF their flash in their compact camera, given a certain light situation, the camera will just pop it up and have it fire! 

But I can't keep comments such as "That photo is going to have a very crooked horizon line", or "The flash will never reach" unsaid to my family when I see that happen . If they overhear such comments, those other photo-takers, I mean, my comments might soon enough become THEIR pet peeves. They might downright begin to HATE all those "know-it-alls with their bigger cameras and longer lenses, pffff!" 

So it is all just a matter of standpoint.


----------



## Battou

LaFoto said:


> Though, truth be told: there's many there who actually just DO NOT KNOW how to switch OFF their flash in their compact camera, given a certain light situation, the camera will just pop it up and have it fire!



There is also a facet I am guilty of in this, that being variation of cameras and developed tendancies, My Sure shot the flash is by default off and must be turned on manually, wile my C-743 is by default on, once turned off it stays off and my T-3D the flash is by default on and needs to be turned off manually with each shot taken.....Needless to say I have taken a hand full of shots with an unwanted flash with both the C series and T-3D :blushing:


----------



## sabbath999

Ajay said:


> I don't mind it if the image is actually good, as all of yours that I've seen are. Sometimes, I admit, I get a little sad thinking back to my darkroom days and how important it was to get the image right in camera since there wasn't any pp that could be done besides burning/dodging.  I love the results I'm able to get now in PS, but I find myself liking the images I created in the darkroom more than anything I'm creating now.  They were so much more thought out.
> 
> I fully respect and appreciate photographers such as yourself who choose not to pp their images.  I am not one of them right now because I am learning so much about photoshop and I'm getting so carried away experimenting and adjusting - then you click to see before and after and it's hard to go back to the before.



While I totally respect where you are coming from, I take a different approach. Photoshopping something allows me to be sloppy, and so I simply do not do it.

I never, ever say, "well, I will take it now and fix it in post." Ever.

As far as I am concerned, getting it right in the camera is the only option for me. I refuse to accept the fact that I am not very good, and I will not rely on post processing as a crutch. The only way *I* will become a better photographer for me to dedicate my efforts to getting it right, in camera, every single time.

Obviously, some times I get into situations where my technical skills are not good enough... and sometimes I reach beyond the technical limitations of my cameras... 

But the only way to improve my skills is to suffer the consequences of failure, and learn from that. Does that mean my pictures are "not quite what they could be" if I spent a bunch of time playing with them in Photoshop? Absolutely. But it also means that I am motivated to do it better the next time.

I rarely ever Photoshop anything. I use Capture NX to crop and resize and correct any problems that were caused by technical problems such as purple fringing (something I simply can't do anything about technically, other than replace lenses), and I do minor color corrections when the camera goes a bit wonky. Also I use it when I shoot RAW, which I do from time to time. 

Mostly, I just use iPhoto.

I have Aperture 1.5, and Lightroom, but I like iPhoto better because it is simple, quick and I just really don't do hardly any post processing at all.

That's what I do... I make no claim whatever that my way is the right way, or the best way, for anybody but myself.


----------



## sabbath999

Battou said:


> There is also a facet I am guilty of in this, that being variation of cameras and developed tendancies, My Sure shot the flash is by default off and must be turned on manually, wile my C-743 is by default on, once turned off it stays off and my T-3D the flash is by default on and needs to be turned off manually with each shot taken.....Needless to say I have taken a hand full of shots with an unwanted flash with both the C series and T-3D :blushing:



I used to have one of these cameras, where you simply couldn't turn the dumb thing off reliably. I used electrical tape over the flash.


----------



## Ajay

sabbath999 said:


> As far as I am concerned, getting it right in the camera is the only option for me. I refuse to accept the fact that I am not very good, and I will not rely on post processing as a crutch. The only way *I* will become a better photographer for me to dedicate my efforts to getting it right, in camera, every single time.
> 
> Obviously, some times I get into situations where my technical skills are not good enough... and sometimes I reach beyond the technical limitations of my cameras...
> 
> But the only way to improve my skills is to suffer the consequences of failure, and learn from that. Does that mean my pictures are "not quite what they could be" if I spent a bunch of time playing with them in Photoshop? Absolutely. But it also means that I am motivated to do it better the next time.


 
I am working towards getting my photos right in camera and I can't wait until I finally do! In the meantime though, I am not going to scrap an image that fell short in camera when I can improve it in photoshop. I feel it is my job as a photographer to make the best version possible of any shot I take and if I didn't achieve that in camera I'll try my best to do it afterwards. Doesn't mean that I won't go out and just continue taking bad shots - I will try even harder next time and slowly my pp time is getting shorter and shorter. (not that I don't delete hundreds of shots all the time - a lot of times there are mistakes that just can't be fixed of course - a hard lesson sometimes). I think the reason I do like postprocessing is because I enjoy shooting mainly portraits and people want to see themselves looking beautiful.  Sometimes that takes very little work and sometimes more extensive work, but I am not going to tell the senior girl I photographed that her skin looks mottled and thats just the way its going to look - if I can make her happier by retouching her skin then I definitely will.  Some people seem to think that is selling out, but I don't know, thats just not the way I feel about it.  We all know that there is a huge learning curve in photography (with lostprophet sitting prettily at the top :greenpbl and we all do what we can to slowly climb it. 

I'm glad that there are so many different viewpoints and opinions on how to do things and I am equally happy to be sharing them with people that don't think that theirs is the only way.


----------



## bhop

HDRs.  I have seen some that look great, but I usually don't like most of them.. 

.


----------



## MarcusM

I just scanned through, and don't think this has been mentioned, and technically this isn't photography per se, but my biggest pet peeve related to posting photographs on these forums is when people feel the need to put a big, fat, ugly watermark over their 200 x 300 pixel images that covers about 30% of the picture, and then they want a critique. You can't even appreciate the photograph.

It's not like someone's going to try to steal an image that size and try to blow it up for prints and sell them.


----------



## Battou

sabbath999 said:


> I used to have one of these cameras, where you simply couldn't turn the dumb thing off reliably. I used electrical tape over the flash.



I've cinsidered this for the T-3D, but the composition of the camera makes me question how well it would work...and then the thoughts got killed off completely during the third roll of film in it when I took some fifteen or more flash needed pics :lmao:


----------



## R-V

Photography forums that take my time from the real reason is am at the computer !?!?


----------



## (Ghastly) Krueger

"Why do you bring the cumbersome camera?" (SLR)
While seeing a woman setting a shot with a tripod: "How can she bring that silly stuff on a holiday?" (roughly translated)
After I set a landscape pic "Why do you want to take that pic without me in it?"


----------



## andrew99

(Ghastly) Krueger said:


> Why do you want to take that pic without me in it?"


Haha!  Yes, or "give me the camera so I can take a pic of you!".

Love the Ultima 3 avatar!


----------



## (Ghastly) Krueger

andrew99 said:


> Haha! Yes, or "give me the camera so I can take a pic of you!".


 
'nother advantage of digital. Let's take the 3 pics...



> Love the Ultima 3 avatar!


 
Thanks!


----------



## skipper34

My worse pet peeve as far as photography is reading posts on forums such as this where the so-called experts don't want to help the newcomers.  I am not saying that this happens on this forum, but I have seen many online forums where this occurs on a regular basis.  For reasons that I haven't quite figured out yet, snobbery runs rampant in the field of photography.  My next worse peeve is when I walk into a local national chain camera store and automatically I am an idiot who doesn't know @#$% from shinola and then the expert salesperson turns out to be dumber than dumb.  This is the reason that I purchase photo gear exclusively online.


----------



## JIP

My personal pet eeve is currently being covered in another thread.  I cant stand people who seem to suggest that you need some kind of "qualification" to buy  a certain kind of gear.  If I am a brand new photographer and I want to (and can afford) buy a Nikon D3 with a 17-55 2.8 and an SB-800 so be it that's what I'm gonna do.


----------



## mrodgers

skipper34 said:


> For reasons that I haven't quite figured out yet, snobbery runs rampant in *every hobby and all over the world in every subject and situation.*


There, I fixed that for you. Because though you have interest and experience in this particular hobby, thus your specifying photography, it isn't only this one. It is every hobby from motorcycles, to racing, to RC flying. 

And I agree, I hate snobbery too.


----------



## mortallis288

I have been doing photography for about 2 years now (wow i just relized it has been two years) and worked at ritz camera. 

1. my number one pet peeve is people not getting prints right. When i worked at wolf camera my boss would contanstly tell me not to reprint a order if they didnt come out right unless the people "noticed". 

2. not having enough time to shoot


----------



## Jus7 A Phas3

I think alot of people with P&S camreas dont know how to turn the flash off so it just goes off all the time, or they dont think it will make a diffrence.

ha, Sorry about that i didnt know that there was two pages, i was posting that from the first page. It is really cool to see a thread that i started get this many posts though :]


----------



## djrichie28

Never really had any peeves until today.  I was out shooting in a historical town known for it's performing arts and boasting brilliant architecture.  As I was composing a shot of some downtown buildings along the main road, a car slowly drove by with some immature dirt bag hanging out the passenger window teasing me.  Is it really that uncool to take pictures these days?  Some people seem to have some real issues.


----------



## kundalini

People making "Camera Faces" when you try to take candids. A large number will either try to turn away their face and close their eyes or make goofy, tounge wagging, eyes popping uberwide faces. I'm talking mostly of friends and family that know you like to photograph, not just random people on the street.


----------



## Mike_E

People who think that something is no good unless it has the right name on it.


----------



## abraxas

"pix"
"photochop"
jet contrails

and otherwise laws that prevent me from slapping people on the back of the head when they have it coming.


----------



## chinpokojed

I guess not directly a photography pet peeve, more like a digital file pet peeve -- 300 DPI..

I do Fine Art Reproduction professionally and people request JPGs for magazines, art shows, etc, and despite the fact that they have no clue what it means, they all need files at 300DPI.  They have no idea what the image size, or pixel dimensions should be, just that they _need_ it to be 300DPI..

No matter how many times I explain it, nobody gets that 3x4 @ 300 DPI  is very different then 24x36 @ 300 DPI..

:banghead:


----------



## Seefutlung

people who simply say "Enjoy" when they post an image.  I don't need to be told to enjoy ... and what makes them so darn-smug-sure that I the image is so awesome than I can't help but feel joy when I view their shot.


----------



## sabbath999

OK, another peeve (although a minor one) is this, and is more a photography forum thing than photography in general.

I don't like it when people put long lists of the equipment they own in their Sig line, instead of a link to their work.

With all due respect, I couldn't care in the slightest what equipment a person owns... owning a particular camera, lens, etc., is MEANINGLESS to me, but the pictures are not. Anybody can own the world's best camera system, all that means is that your credit card wasn't over the limit at the time of purchase.

To me, the best way to show me what equipment you have is to list what you were using and your EXIF information when you post your pictures in the gallery.

If I recall correctly, TPF actually has a rule against long equipment lists in your sig lines anyway... I may be wrong, but I don't think so.

If you don't have an online gallery or are not ready to show your work, then how about something about yourself instead... something that share a bit of your personality.

The following:

D300, D80, D40, 70-200 VR, 105 VR, blah blah blah....

means nothing... doesn't tell you whether I know my butt from a hole in the ground when it comes to taking pictures.

If you MUST have something in your sig about your camera, how about something like "I shoot Nikon" or "I shoot Canon".

Just my humble opinion.


----------



## shorty6049

your "humble" opinion is probably going to make quite a few people a little angry...


----------



## chinpokojed

sabbath999 said:


> OK, another peeve (although a minor one) is this, and is more a photography forum thing than photography in general.
> 
> I don't like it when people put long lists of the equipment they own in their Sig line, instead of a link to their work.<snip>



As my dad says, "Don't show me what's in your bag, show me what's on your wall!"


----------



## djrichie28

Yeah I can see the list of equipment thing in ones sig becoming annoying if people tend to use it as a bragging means.  However, sometimes I find it helps to weigh against some peoples opinions posted in other threads in the forum.  It helps to see if someone has a biased opinion for particular equipment when assisting someone who is looking to buy.  But in that same sense you're right, someone could simply put "I shoot Nikon" etc.


----------



## shorty6049

i just put my stuff, becasue 1) i'm proud of my equipment. Kind of like on a car forum, i'm sure a lot of people have what kind of car they drive in their sig.
2)so i dont have to write down what i was using for every photo i post. 

but everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I also have noticed that it has been beneficial to others that i list my gear though. I've had people PM me asking how i liked the a700, or the sigma 10-20 a couple times now after they saw it in my sig. So if by having it in there i'm helping people out, then i think thats great. whenever i'm looking to buy something, i think some of the best advice is from people who already own the stuff


----------



## THORHAMMER

usayit said:


> In general, People who interrupt my creativity with their banter....
> 
> Kinda like interrupting a conversation or listening in on a conversation.  Even worse... people who interrupt me to talk about equipment.  Its the same group that usually get into a  contest over equipment.
> 
> I'm usually pretty good at maintaining my composure and not come off as angry.  I have convinced myself that I might be standing there silently for a few moments just thinking about the next step and that could be interpreted as a good time to spark conversation.
> 
> My other pet peeves...
> 
> Non-constructive critiques....  we are all learning and if someone doesn't want to contribute to the learning process they should just keep their comments to themselves.
> 
> The fact that our society is paranoid of individuals with cameras....  Sparks the "I'm not a pervert" syndrome in me.




I started wearing headphones and my mp3 player just for that reason. 
People just wont shut up...


----------



## sabbath999

shorty6049 said:


> i just put my stuff, becasue 1) i'm proud of my equipment. Kind of like on a car forum, i'm sure a lot of people have what kind of car they drive in their sig.
> 2)so i dont have to write down what i was using for every photo i post.
> 
> but everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I also have noticed that it has been beneficial to others that i list my gear though. I've had people PM me asking how i liked the a700, or the sigma 10-20 a couple times now after they saw it in my sig. So if by having it in there i'm helping people out, then i think thats great. whenever i'm looking to buy something, i think some of the best advice is from people who already own the stuff



Please note I said INSTEAD of a link to their work... not UNDER a link to their work, like yours is...


----------



## sabbath999

Another thought on this...

Cameras are not like cars in the sense that cars are both to be seen and to be driven. 

A lot of people really dress up their cars for the sole purpose of showing them off. Yes, the cars can be driven, but the real reason for the cars (the custom wheels, the custom sound systems, the paint jobs, etc.) is STYLE.

Cameras are simply for taking pictures. I suppose you could pinstripe them so that they would look "hot", but really that would be kind of silly to most people. 

The entire purpose of a camera is not to impress other people, it is to take pictures. There is no other reason to own one...

In photography, it isn't about the quality of your equipment, it is about what you DO with your equipment... the same cannot be said for the automotive world... many of the coolest cars in the world are never actually driven any farther than on or off the trailer taking them to the next car show.


----------



## Christina

dpolston said:


> Another pet peeve is anybody with a camera can now be a "photographer". 90% of the people that call themselves "pro's", SUCK! Just because I own a pair of tennis shoes does not make me an athlete!


 

I feel like that sometimes. When you go to a general place and see random people carrying equipment that serious photographers use, It makes me think, "well if everyone is doing it, then what the hell am i studying up and trying to learn for?"

even though most of the time, they buy it for normal here and there shots.

makes me feel like a total newbie thats never gunna measure up.


----------



## Lacey Anne

Christina said:


> I feel like that sometimes. When you go to a general place and see random people carrying equipment that serious photographers use, It makes me think, "well if everyone is doing it, then what the hell am i studying up and trying to learn for?"
> 
> even though most of the time, they buy it for normal here and there shots.
> 
> makes me feel like a total newbie thats never gunna measure up.


Ah, but people like that don't have a clue what they're doing. My dad bought an SLR camera for his vacation to Egypt. He has no idea how to use it so he's sending his wife to the local community college to take a class just to figure out how to use the camera.:lmao:


----------



## Christina

Lacey Anne said:


> Ah, but people like that don't have a clue what they're doing. My dad bought an SLR camera for his vacation to Egypt. He has no idea how to use it so he's sending his wife to the local community college to take a class just to figure out how to use the camera.:lmao:


 

hehe, well that makes me feel a little better when im standing next to them with my camera


----------



## Sw1tchFX

Equipment does not make you into a photographer. 


Not enough people understand this.


----------



## snra786

"nice camera, no wonder you're pictures come out nice"
... No I spent a lot of time to understand how photography works, thank you


----------



## NJMAN

This is sort of a peeve, but it has to do with a certain incident that happened to me about 6 months ago. 

I entered a local photography contest last fall, and it was the first time I ever entered my work in a contest.  I put a lot of time and effort into refining, printing, and professionally mounting 4 of my landscapes to be judged in this competition.  The total number of photos entered was something like 400 from local area people.  Like I said, I had never entered a photo contest before, and I had no expectations at all.  

After the competition was over, and the ribbons were hung next to the winning entries, there were people milling around the gallery and looking at the results (no, I didnt win anything, but 1 of my 4 works received honorable mention).  

I overheard a conversation between 2 people, a middle aged guy and a much older guy.  The middle aged guy was showing the old guy some of the photos and from what little I heard from him (wasn't trying to eavesdrop, but it was a smaller room), he sounded very cynical and snobby.  He singled one of my landscape photos, not knowing me or my work, and proceeded to tell the old guy "Now take this one for example, with digital cameras, anyone can do something like this.  These days, you just run an effect in photoshop, and its easy."   I wanted so bad to stop him and say "F U!!  You dont know me or how much time and work I put into this photograph!"  But I kept my mouth shut and walked away, but I was pissed.  

I mean really, who in the hell is he to go cocking off about something he knows nothing about at all, trying to sound like a know-it-all in front of someone else he's with. 

It really pissed me off that someone can just look at a photo and not think twice about degrading the work of someone they dont even know.  I spent several hours processing and editing that photograph and it received honorable mention by the judges.  I was very thrilled that the judges even considered it at all.  Then, you have butt holes walking around cutting down your work when they have no idea what they are talking about. 

Sorry to ramble, but its been 6 months since then, and the disrespect still leaves a bad taste in my mouth.


----------



## Sw1tchFX

Must have been an HDR, eh? 

Yeah, I get that all the time.


----------



## NJMAN

Sw1tchFX said:


> Must have been an HDR, eh?
> 
> Yeah, I get that all the time.


 
Yes, as a matter of fact it was (Victorian Fantasy).  But still, it does not give him any right to badmouth my work, or anyone else's work for that matter.  Doesn't it make your blood boil when it happens to you?  But even if I had said something, it probably wouldnt have changed anything anyway.  I dont think I will be entering that particular contest next year.  What do I need to prove anyway?  If I make a sale, that would be better than winning a contest anyday.


----------



## Neuner

Threads about Pet Peaves get me so angry!!!  






:er:


----------



## Lacey Anne

Christina said:


> hehe, well that makes me feel a little better when im standing next to them with my camera


Yeah, I cracked up when my dad told me.


----------



## skiboarder72

snra786 said:


> "nice camera, no wonder you're pictures come out nice"
> ... No I spent a lot of time to understand how photography works, thank you



yea that one pisses me off too... they act like if they had the camera they could take a great picture too...


----------



## Tiberius47

"Why are you using flash during the DAY?"  *Turns to friend*  "He's got a fancy camera, but he doesn't know how to use it.  Flash is for when it's dark."


----------



## JJP

I was doing a wedding not too long ago, and just as the first kiss was about to happen, thousands of flashes from compact and disposable cameras came out of nowhere, and ruined my images. 

Luckily I managed to get one good image out of it, but now I always mention to the bride or groom to ask the guests not to take photographs if it will get in the way of my photos. D-:


----------



## Sabin

Not, being able to afford a new camera,  realizing that beginners luck definitly does apply to photography.  Having no idea where to go to get a new subject to shoot.


----------



## NJMAN

Sabin said:


> Not, being able to afford a new camera, realizing that beginners luck definitly does apply to photography. Having no idea where to go to get a new subject to shoot.


 
I've been there too.  You can't lose heart.  Just keep trying to make it, and let your passion for good photography drive you to where you want to be.


----------



## The_Traveler

I skimmed the responses quickly and didn't see this one so here goes:

my peeve is when someone (usually a newbie) posts 10-12 entirely different types of pictures and asks, "what do you think of these?"


----------



## terri

sabbath999 said:


> OK, another peeve (although a minor one) is this, and is more a photography forum thing than photography in general.
> 
> I don't like it when people put long lists of the equipment they own in their Sig line, instead of a link to their work.
> 
> With all due respect, I couldn't care in the slightest what equipment a person owns... owning a particular camera, lens, etc., is MEANINGLESS to me, but the pictures are not. Anybody can own the world's best camera system, all that means is that your credit card wasn't over the limit at the time of purchase.
> 
> To me, the best way to show me what equipment you have is to list what you were using and your EXIF information when you post your pictures in the gallery.
> 
> *If I recall correctly, TPF actually has a rule against long equipment lists in your sig lines anyway... I may be wrong, but I don't think so.*
> 
> If you don't have an online gallery or are not ready to show your work, then how about something about yourself instead... something that share a bit of your personality.
> 
> The following:
> 
> D300, D80, D40, 70-200 VR, 105 VR, blah blah blah....
> 
> means nothing... doesn't tell you whether I know my butt from a hole in the ground when it comes to taking pictures.
> 
> If you MUST have something in your sig about your camera, how about something like "I shoot Nikon" or "I shoot Canon".
> 
> Just my humble opinion.


You are not wrong. We actually would prefer it if you put your gear list in your profile. If someone is interested in your work, it's a click away to see what equipment you have. As we all know, the equipment does not *make* the shot, nor does it mean you know what to do with it. 

Some of these gear lists on people's signatures are so long they actually detract from their own posts. The signature guidelines are located under the FAQ's.


----------



## Socrates

sabbath999 said:


> While I totally respect where you are coming from, I take a different approach. Photoshopping something allows me to be sloppy, and so I simply do not do it.
> 
> I never, ever say, "well, I will take it now and fix it in post." Ever.
> 
> As far as I am concerned, getting it right in the camera is the only option for me. I refuse to accept the fact that I am not very good, and I will not rely on post processing as a crutch. The only way *I* will become a better photographer for me to dedicate my efforts to getting it right, in camera, every single time.
> 
> Obviously, some times I get into situations where my technical skills are not good enough... and sometimes I reach beyond the technical limitations of my cameras...
> 
> But the only way to improve my skills is to suffer the consequences of failure, and learn from that. Does that mean my pictures are "not quite what they could be" if I spent a bunch of time playing with them in Photoshop? Absolutely. But it also means that I am motivated to do it better the next time.
> 
> I rarely ever Photoshop anything. I use Capture NX to crop and resize and correct any problems that were caused by technical problems such as purple fringing (something I simply can't do anything about technically, other than replace lenses), and I do minor color corrections when the camera goes a bit wonky. Also I use it when I shoot RAW, which I do from time to time.
> 
> Mostly, I just use iPhoto.
> 
> I have Aperture 1.5, and Lightroom, but I like iPhoto better because it is simple, quick and I just really don't do hardly any post processing at all.
> 
> That's what I do... I make no claim whatever that my way is the right way, or the best way, for anybody but myself.


 
:hail:


----------



## The_Traveler

even by myself.


----------



## Fate

"wow that camera takes GREAT photos"

*punches friend in face* lol


----------



## dleblanc

andrew99 said:


> I am loving this thread!
> 
> Some of mine:
> 
> - People assuming that because I have a DSLR, that it can magically take amazing, magazine quality pictures.
> *- Watching people with P&S camera's making silly mistakes like shooting people with the sun directly behind (with no flash) or using the flash when they shouldn't (shooting through glass, etc).*
> - Staff in photography stores who give false information
> - The spiraling costs of getting into this hobby!
> - Dust on the lens or sensor
> - The amount of time I now spend on the computer playing with photoshop and other image tweaking software!


 
Funny story... I work at a local small-time amusement park. It's getting bigger, but it's only 70 or so employees. Anyways, I was working on a go-kart track with 2 other guys and we were talking while there was 4 go karts out on the track. We are paying attention, but we're not staring at the track. We're there talking to each other. Anyways, we see a red light from like 300+ feet away up in a window. And then we see the flash go off. We noticed that it was our boss taking pictures of us.

So yesterday we had an employee meeting and the boss brought it up that there were three guys standing at the track not once watching the race (Which was complete crap.) So I just had to call him out on it... I told him that we were not only watching the race, but we also saw him attempt to take a picture with his flash on from that far away through a window. I patted him on the back and laughed at him and he was just like "Damn glare on the window." 

Sometimes I wonder why I'm not higher up in this world. :lmao:


----------



## Tiberius47

The_Traveler said:


> I skimmed the responses quickly and didn't see this one so here goes:
> 
> my peeve is when someone (usually a newbie) posts 10-12 entirely different types of pictures and asks, "what do you think of these?"



I have a similar one.  People post a dozen photos that are almost identical.  This bugs me.  Just take the best one or two.


----------



## DeepSpring

rmh159 said:


> When people use flash to try to light a subject that's 1/2 a mile away.
> 
> For example... in the US during the Superbowl when it's time for kick-off you see about 50,000 flashes fire.  You have to wonder how many of those people *really* think the flash does anything to help expose the field.



I was shooting a fireworks show last 4th of july and this lady came up to me and asked if she should use her flash. When I said it wouldnt do anything she went on for 5 minutes saying are you sure?????? and the like.


----------



## THORHAMMER

DeepSpring said:


> I was shooting a fireworks show last 4th of july and this lady came up to me and asked if she should use her flash. When I said it wouldnt do anything she went on for 5 minutes saying are you sure?????? and the like.



Today I had the honor of taking my girl to the california adventure disney thing, someone at work had an extra ticket. 

I was astonished to see they have these walk around photographers(disney photogs)  trying to sell you portraits of yourself. 

They were using tripods in the middle of the day, I was like 2000 shutter @ F16... Also they had hotshoe flashes with no diffusers just bare flashing it. 

I watched in horror as they were taking shots with the sun sideways, making huuge nose shadows that the flash cannot fix at that angle. 
My stomach curled when I saw a lady try to plug in a battery pack for the flash into her walkie talkie. 

Why dont they get wireless strobes and setup 5 or 6 stations with little softboxes of unbrellas and a shade cover. The locations could be strategic 
so that the background is perfect part of the park. 

People would pay good money for that. Ill bet I could make a few hundred an hour in there with my setup. 

Oh well just bugs me.....


----------



## Battou

THORHAMMER said:


> Today I had the honor of taking my girl to the california adventure disney thing, someone at work had an extra ticket.
> 
> I was astonished to see they have these walk around photographers(disney photogs)  trying to sell you portraits of yourself.
> 
> They were using tripods in the middle of the day, I was like 2000 shutter @ F16... Also they had hotshoe flashes with no diffusers just bare flashing it.
> 
> I watched in horror as they were taking shots with the sun sideways, making huuge nose shadows that the flash cannot fix at that angle.
> My stomach curled when I saw a lady try to plug in a battery pack for the flash into her walkie talkie.
> 
> Why dont they get wireless strobes and setup 5 or 6 stations with little softboxes of unbrellas and a shade cover. The locations could be strategic
> so that the background is perfect part of the park.
> 
> People would pay good money for that. Ill bet I could make a few hundred an hour in there with my setup.
> 
> Oh well just bugs me.....



What should be more irritating is that if tried that, you would be kicked out of the park....Do not pass GO do not collect 200 dollars.

I'b be willing to bet these Photogs are the people that went to work on Disneys production teams and faild to make the cut and are busy gathering experiance wile still on the payroll in the hopes of eventually making it on to the production teams.....They would prolly be the first ones to stab you in the back and call security if they see you literally doing their job, better or not.


----------



## Anelle

Interesting thread!   I've done both film&darkroom (was a journalist in my life before kids) and digital.  When I started shooting digital I had to brush up but I definitely benefited from the era before PS when you pretty much had to get it right in camera.  This said however, I REALLY like PS as long as it is gentle!  Otherwise it looks like a cheap woman with make-up plastered on!

1.  Parents who tell their kids:  "SMILE!!!!  Show some teeth!!!!"  ARRRGGHHHH!!

2.  Newbies who get defensive/are offended when honest cc is given.

3.  People who call bad photography a style choice!  When you blow out the whites because you dont' have the basics down IT IS NOT A STYLE CHOICE!!!!

4.  People who think that an expensive camera guarantees great photos!  I've seen great photographers taking FANTASTIC pics with cheap cameras and I've seen some really pathetic photographer taking dreadful pics with a Mark I.  Owning a Canon (or Nikon) makes you a Canon owner, not a photographer  

5.  The phrase:  I am an intuitive photographer... ie.  the photographer actually knows nothing about the basics, isn't willing to learn, probably has their camera on Auto but believes that they are great and should start charging!

6.  Selective Colouring unless it is VERY subtle and it is actually part of the story the photo tells!  But man, the parents LOVE it!

7.  People who use photoshop and do some really funky stuff with it to cover up their inability to take a technically correct photo.

Marcus, I suspect my pics were some you refered to regarding the big watermarks... although I do understand where you come from, I've actually had pics stolen from another photography forum before and they were used by another photographer on her website! :-/  Now, I'm rather safe than sorry!  I think even with the watermark, it is easy enough for someone to see whether the photo is technically correct or not.

Anelle  



Another is


----------



## Kanikula

Ooh good thread!

So here are mine

- People who boast about there "superier" equipment 

- Said people who produce cr@p or average results with said equipment

- Those who cant take CCs as they feel their image is perfect

- Being told that a real photographer doesnt need to PP

- Brand Wars

- People calling themselves or others "Togs"

- People selling themselves (and their services) as a pro even though waht they are producing is sh*t and are still learning the basics


*sigh* feel much better now


----------



## Seefutlung

^5 Anelle ... I have a similar story ... quit journalism so I have a "real" life making "real" money with a "real" job and be able to support a "real" family.  

Back in the film only days ... the darkroom separated the men from the boys ... a photographer develop and printed his/her own stuff ... everyone else was just a pretender. As to PP-ing,  generally I restrict my processing only to the tools/methodologies I had available in a wet darkroom. (I hate too much make-up.)

As to your peeves:

1) ehhh who cares

2) Yes! (all those unwarranted "Atta Boy!" are distasteful.)

3) Good call

4) I call those people "Collectors"

5) hahahahahahahaha ... "When I walk into a shoot my mind is empty ..." (So much for previsualization)

6) no reason to comment

7) Hey that's "Art"

Gary


----------



## andrew99

Anelle said:


> This said however, I REALLY like PS as long as it is gentle!  Otherwise it looks like a cheap woman with make-up plastered on!



Best quote ever!  :mrgreen::mrgreen::mrgreen:   Although I am guilty of it more than once!


----------



## Wozza

Someone already called out 'pix' - for me a worse one is 'foto'. :thumbdown:


----------



## LaFoto

"Foto" is perfect German *and *Spanish spelling! What's wrong with "das Foto" or "la foto" (shortened to LaFoto)???


----------



## Wozza

Haha - oops.

To be a bit more specific, a lot of businesses here are called things like 'fast foto' or have signs like 'develop your foto's'. New Zealand is neither a german or spanish speaking country. A lot of people actually think some 'txt' abbreviations are how things are spelt.

An example of this is for a web assignment once we had to redesign a website for a business and some people used expressions such as 'for u' - this can be hard enough to read in a forum from time to time but instantly makes something look unproffesional in my opinion.

In your case Corinna it is perfectly acceptable as you speak german. I just don't see why people here should spell it like that - how much more effort is an extra letter?


----------



## LaFoto

Yes, I see and even share your point on the wrong spellings in advertising, for example. They don't impress me at all, though I think they are MEANT to impress.

My screenname is SPANISH, by the way, though, as a matter of fact, the spelling of "photo" in both those languages is identical. 

But these wrong spellings in general might lead us away from the *photography *pet peeves and into the realm of the everyday pet peeves, and deliberate (!) wrong spelling is one of my very big ones...!


----------



## GeorgeUK

I don't have too many to be honest...

- People spending crazy £££ on new lenses left right and centre thinking it will produce a good photo when all it needs is some time and patience to learn.

- Dust. It just upsets me.

I'm sure I'll think of some more.


----------



## The_Traveler

Wozza said:


> Someone already called out 'pix' - for me a worse one is 'foto'. :thumbdown:



I am just curious why people dislike 'pix'?


I know why 'I could care less' irritates me.


----------



## chinpokojed

The_Traveler said:


> I know why 'I could care less' irritates me.



Oh yes, that and "irregardless" drive me crazy..


----------



## LaFoto

chinpokojed said:
			
		

> Originally Posted by *The_Traveler*
> 
> 
> _I know why 'I could care less' irritates me._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh yes, that and "irregardless" drive me crazy..
Click to expand...

 
Teehee... but those are more "general pet peeves", aren't they?


----------



## Emerana

new pet peeve...when my 1 year old daughter grabs my camera and smashes it on the ground and thinks its funny, breaking my $70 lens...I know its not expensive but I wouldnt have to be buying another one if she would just listen to me and not touch the damnnnnn camera


----------



## Battou

Emerana said:


> new pet peeve...when my 1 year old daughter grabs my camera and smashes it on the ground and thinks its funny, breaking my $70 lens...I know its not expensive but I wouldnt have to be buying another one if she would just listen to me and not touch the damnnnnn camera



That is something that is going to happen with expencive merchendice around children, the only thing I can say is learn form that one, it's going to be a few years before she understands the concept of expence. Even longer before she "Truly understands" it.


----------



## ladywings

I have 2...

1) People who don't stop and get out of the car to take a picture.  If it's worth taking a picture of, it's worth the time it would take to stop.

I was reminded of my second one when I saw this.


> 2) is petty.  I just hate it when I have set up a shot and people with the dinky p*s cameras step in front and start firing off their little flashes ruining my photo or making me wait.  Esp. when I know their photo isn't going to turn out


2) People with DSLRs who think that because I have a point and shoot, I don't know what I'm doing.  I can take better pictures with my point and shoot than a lot of people I know can take with their DSLR.  In fact, I bought my point and shoot from someone who upgraded to a DSLR, and I STILL take better pictures than she does. She even asked me how I got some of my shots, with the camera she sold me.  I told her "I know how to shoot in manual mode". 

By the way, I have a DSLR as well, but use it mainly in my studio or for something I know my point and shoot just won't cut it for (weddings, low light situations, etc).

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ladywings


----------



## shorty6049

Battou said:


> That is something that is going to happen with expencive merchendice around children, the only thing I can say is learn form that one, it's going to be a few years before she understands the concept of expence. Even longer before she "Truly understands" it.


 

at least it was only a 70 dollar lens. I have a few that if someone broke, i'd probably jump out a window... (not that 70 dollars isnt still a lot of money, but you're just lucky that if it had to happen, it didnt happen to something worth 7 times as much)


----------



## Battou

I have a new one


Forum trolls who have the audasity to tell me in open forum that I am a "shtty photographer" when all they have to offer is a bunch of crap wannabe protraiture that is not even suited for MySpace, if that even.


----------



## shorty6049

haha, i took a look at that... what a FRIENDLY forum!


----------



## Battou

shorty6049 said:


> haha, i took a look at that... what a FRIENDLY forum!



It's not that bad once you get out of general and random discussions, but some of the trolls are just to persistant with their ban evasion, we just ignore them and or verbally beat on them. 

Truth is that troll in particular is a remnent from when I was first added to the staff there, His girl friend was best friends with one of the administrators who I replaced, He is the only remaining one that attacks me at any given oppertunity.


----------



## Harmony

Battou said:


> Truth is that troll in particular is a remnent from when I was first added to the staff there, His girl friend was best friends with one of the administrators who I replaced, He is the only remaining one that attacks me at any given oppertunity.


 
:shock: Do they not BAN people on that forum???


----------



## Battou

Harmony said:


> :shock: Do they not BAN people on that forum???



That one in particular has been banned numurous times, he uses his proxy to side step it and create a new account.


----------



## 68Whiskey

1.) When people blatantly walk in front of you when taking photos.

2.) People who own point and shoot cameras that cost more than a entry level DSLR.

3.) Photographers who use strobes in a way that annoy the fans watching the event, they are more important than your photos.... Sorry....

4.) People who think Apple/Mac computers never crash, liars.

5.) The fact that I do not own a Mark III yet.

6.) How the IHSA is being a bunch of douchebags about photo regulations just because they want to make a extra buck or two.

I could go on and on and on.


----------



## BYoung

Mine is people who interrupt you for no reason at all when you are setting up a photo.

I went out during some killer Northern Lights, set up my tripod in a nice dark area. I left my truck running behind me so people knew I was there and no one could hit me and the like. Then some (removed do to language) drives up the other way (the way I'm facing) and just sits there with his lights shining right into my eyes. So I walked over to him and asked him nicely to move along or turn off his lights since it was shining in my eyes and camera, hence ruining pictures of the awesome sky. The guy had the nerve to yell at me saying "I was helping you by giving you light, you don't have to be an a-hole about it"

Man... almost lost my cool on this guy, but I said thanks for your concern but your lights are still in my face and shot, so he drove off all mad and gave me the finger.


----------



## Tasmaster

Friends who are not models and immediatly get into tottaly awkward, self-conscious poses when i try to take a random shot of them.


----------



## The_Traveler

A newly discovered pet peeve.

Posters who ask for C/C, then ignore the CC but profusely thank fanboys.


----------



## astrostu

- Cell phone camera pictures that people think are a just-as-good substitute for a DSLR.

- Power/Telephone lines and poles.

- Over-sharpening the moon to make it look like a high school petri dish experiment.

- Dust.

- "Lense"


----------



## Emerana

ladywings said:


> I have 2...
> 
> 1) People who don't stop and get out of the car to take a picture. If it's worth taking a picture of, it's worth the time it would take to stop.


 
I have taken photos from the car if I really really want it.  Not as much anymore but I did alot when I first started.  Cause you know, to get out of the car means taking 2 kids, a diaper bag, a stroller out, wiping sticking fingers or changing a poopy diaper then fighting the to get them back in again because they want to play.  Some people arent lazy


----------



## mrodgers

It also means that when you see traffic coming up from behind you, it is a quick toss into gear and go rather than traffic stopping while you climb back into the car with your gear kind of messing around.

Some places you just can't pull over, but the traffic is light enough (read area is rural enough so hardly ever any traffic) that you can stop in the middle of the road and shoot out the window.


----------



## Rusty105

OK, I have a few
-People thinking Digital is better then film, or film is better the digital (each has its place)

-Rising cost of film development

- The rising cost of going digital, yes I want one, but I will still shoot film!

-The ever dwindling supply of 'decent' places to develop film

-A single scratch from one end of a negative all the way to the other, and the tech at the 1 hour place blames my camera, because they clean their machine regularly. Yet the slides I sent out to a Real lab are flawless.

-Over processed photos, you know the ones

-One that really tick me was a comment I received on another forum. I was messing around with 80-200 zoom I rented, I got one good comment/suggestion, then some nitwit posts "So - you've gone and taken a picture of a duck hey! " Yet he has not 1 photo posted, aaargh!

- Ok a big one, and this goes for all the forums I visit. 'text speak' is NOT a language. Unless you are posting on a gamerz, or Warez forum it is not appropriate. Most of the forums I visit are 'serious' hobby forums, or semi-pro level. People take their work or hobby seriously, and many are multi-national, and a comment like 'hey I lik ur pic' is rude. Learn proper language, notice I didn't say English. if you want to speak like that expect that not every one will take you seriously.

Ahh, that feels better
Anyway, sorry this is my first post, I will post an intro post somewhere. is there a new members posting forum? I have some of my work in the gallery in my sig line. I will try to post some of them here as well, so I can get some comments here.
Thanks


----------



## Tiberius47

Welcome to the forums, Rusty!  I agree with just about everything you said.  Except I don't shoot film, so I wouldn't know about the cost.

The camera shop I get my pics printed usually does adjustments on the photos they print, but they know not to do it for my pics.


----------



## JRob

Pet peave of mine is the fact that I am an idiot and forget to change the iso setting from 1600 when shooting in low light the night before to 100 when I shoot in sunlight in the middle of the day.  

I do that WAY too much.


----------



## JRob

I also hate when I have my gear out and people try to just grab it and look at it.


----------



## ladywings

I have to agree with Rusty on the over processed photos.  I'll go a step beyond that and say especially over saturated photos.

Also, photography contests that allow heavily manipulated entries.  If it no longer looks like a photograph, should it really be in a photography contest?


----------



## christopher walrath

'Dude, look at my new digital camera.  It only cost about a thousand bucks.'  (and they don't even know what a thing about friggin f-stop thingies)


----------



## NJMAN

The_Traveler said:


> I know why 'I could care less' irritates me.


 
I know why it irritates me too. Its an expression that idiots use when they don't care about something or have no interest in something, when the proper usage should be "I couldn't care less". But that's American colloquialism for you.  Okay, so this is a bit off topic, so I will return you to your regularly scheduled programming.


----------



## Harmony

christopher walrath said:


> (and they don't even know what a thing about friggin f-stop thingies)


 

not to be rude... but it doesn't sound like you do either!


----------



## fadingaway1986

Stupid customers. LOL...

Ok. I work at Kmart in the minilab, and a while ago I had a run in with a customer... 

They were complaining about his photos, I did everything I could to help them (reprinted them on the spot, etc) anyway the guy turned nasty and starts questioning the resolution of the scanner on our instant machines.

Now, this is not the sort of information we are given, so I can't answer that. But those machines print crap quality anyway - so like the resolution of the scanner is gonna do much for you. the photo will still look gross... 


Orrrr the guy who was complaining that our machine wouldn't read his files. He asked if it was because they were too big. I asked how big they were (thinking 5MB or something) and he says 500mb... he was printing a 4x6! I told him that is probably why and he might have to reduce the size, and he told me he would not be sacrificing the quality of his 4x6...

hahahahahaha. that day was funny.


another one: people who say "ooohhh take a photo of that" - and you know that there is no way in hell that you would get a reasonable picture out of that. Sure it looks pretty, but it ain't gonna expose properly... and they just can't understand why you don't wanna take the photo


----------



## Battou

fadingaway1986 said:


> Stupid customers. LOL...
> 
> Ok. I work at Kmart in the minilab, and a while ago I had a run in with a customer...
> 
> They were complaining about his photos, I did everything I could to help them (reprinted them on the spot, etc) anyway the guy turned nasty and starts questioning the resolution of the scanner on our instant machines.
> 
> Now, this is not the sort of information we are given, so I can't answer that. But those machines print crap quality anyway - so like the resolution of the scanner is gonna do much for you. the photo will still look gross...



Interesting, Somewhat flawed but...Interesting none the less. The part I underlined in red is my biggest problem with Minilabs like that. Many of them do not have very theurough training. Many problems like that have solutions, but it would seem that you had no means of correcting whatever it was the customer saw, and you as the opperator are basically going to be left to figure it out on your own. Learning more about the machine there could be to your benefit


----------



## fadingaway1986

Battou - what do you mean whatever the customer saw? 

they wanted to know what resolution the scanner was (because they weren't impressed when I apologised that they didnt think i was helpful, but i had done everything i could to help them) so this was their way of making me unhelpful


----------



## fadingaway1986

By the way - the thread you pointed me to... we definately don't print on inkjet paper. Our prints are RA, unless you want them instantly, at which point you do them on the bad quality instant machines


----------



## Battou

fadingaway1986 said:


> Battou - what do you mean whatever the customer saw?
> 
> they wanted to know what resolution the scanner was (because they weren't impressed when I apologised that they didnt think i was helpful, but i had done everything i could to help them) so this was their way of making me unhelpful



I don't know everything about them but I do know there are several things that may not go right in the process on the machinery. The customer could have seen any one of a handfull of things. I my self commonly see improper exposures, but had I been stupid it still is not something I would think scanning resoultion would change. I have to assume there may heve been something more along the lines of what the OP of the thread I linked saw but I could be wrong on that.

*EDIT*


fadingaway1986 said:


> By the way - the thread you pointed me to... we definately don't print on inkjet paper. Our prints are RA, unless you want them instantly, at which point you do them on the bad quality instant machines


That I did not know, However Alpha had similar results with a digital RA process


----------



## fadingaway1986

The problem was nothing to do with their question... The problem (from memory) was an emulsion problem, which I fixed and reprinted straight away for them. 

They wanted the old photos destroyed straight away, which we cannot do, I told them they would be shredded first thing the following day, they weren't happy. I called a manager, who offered to lock them in the safe overnight for them, and then they would be shredded the next day, but they started yelling about the service being ****. SO I said "I am sorry you feel that way sir, but I feel I have done everything I can to help you"... 

At which point he turned and said "oh really, well lets see if you can tell me this (in a real smart-arse voice) what resolution is your scanner over there?

I told him I did not know this information, and asked him why it was he wanted to know? He scoffed at me and stormed off yelling that "clearly you know NOTHING about photography"...

Not what my diploma says... but yeah... 

My point is, if he was so concerned about the resolution of the scanner, he should know that those machines print super dodgy photos...

(they are the ones that work on the thermal ribbon)


----------



## fadingaway1986

oh. and nooo idea what alpha is? By the way - we do have an inkjet printer.. But I don't think it has ever been connected to a computer... in the 5 years I have worked there. and its only a document printer


----------



## Battou

fadingaway1986 said:


> oh. and nooo idea what alpha is? By the way - we do have an inkjet printer.. But I don't think it has ever been connected to a computer... in the 5 years I have worked there. and its only a document printer



Alpha is one of the users who posted in the thread I pointed out.


----------



## fadingaway1986

Ahh well that is odd. I have never seen them pixelate before... 

ours is a noritsu aswell.

We no longer do films at our lab as of last week, so don't have that problem now anyway


----------



## Ajay

"I like this photo, _*I'm not sure why*_..."

Pick a reason!


----------



## shorty6049

haha, oh yeah, thats another good one... AND it almost sounds like they feel like they shouldnt be liking it, so they're trying to explain why


----------



## The_Traveler

Ajay said:


> "I like this photo, _*I'm not sure why*_..."
> 
> Pick a reason!



A clear follow-up to this is,

"I'm just a newbie/amateur/beginner/moron (pick one), but I think your picture is brilliant."

:blushing::blushing::blushing:


----------



## Luxowell

Mine, as mentioned by others before, it the level of snobbery some people can have with their equipment.  I know people who don't shoot canon and never say a word, and I know some people who are great, until they spend an hour telling my how much better their Nikon is.
Really?  That's great.  I'm happy for you.  Now, could we talk about something that isn't going to make me hate you?


----------



## shorty6049

Luxowell said:


> Mine, as mentioned by others before, it the level of snobbery some people can have with their equipment.  I know people who don't shoot canon and never say a word, and I know some people who are great, until they spend an hour telling my how much better their Nikon is.
> Really?  That's great.  I'm happy for you.  Now, could we talk about something that isn't going to make me hate you?




haha, SO true


----------



## Lyncca

shorty6049 said:


> haha, SO true



Well, if you used Nikon, then you wouldn't have to be told for an hour.  You would just know it was better....  *snicker*

Kidding aside, I have to agree with you.  I know several people that use Canon and we all get along quite well.  We tend to just talk photography in general and techniques not what brand we have, besides just to be able to discuss absolute specifics.

I don't like equipment or photography snobs.  I was an idiot at one time with my silly flash going off too.  Now when I see this, I giggle, but it doesn't really change my life any either way if someone else has crappy pictures.  I'm just glad I know why MINE were crap and that I am working to fix them


----------



## The_Traveler

Can we all agree than Canon has one 'n'?


----------



## Lyncca

The_Traveler said:


> Can we all agree than Canon has one 'n'?



*blush*  Um yea   At least I don't spell it wrong and own one!


----------



## fadingaway1986

But canon has two n's


----------



## The_Traveler




----------



## shorty6049

love that


----------



## Sw1tchFX

The_Traveler said:


>


----------



## usayit

THORHAMMER said:


> I started wearing headphones and my mp3 player just for that reason.
> People just wont shut up...



What a great idea!!!   I am surprised I never thought about it before as I usually have pretty nice background music on all the time.... especially when I'm in my cube really trying to concentrate on work.  

My bluetooth stereo headphones (No wires to get tangled with other stuff) are going to be a regular item in my bag now...  Thanks!


----------



## christopher walrath

Oh, and people saying that they don't like Ansel Adams when they probably don't have a clue that half the gear they use today probably wouldn't exist if it weren't for the hard work and study and years of trial and error he and others like him did to make it possible.


----------



## shorty6049

christopher walrath said:


> Oh, and people saying that they don't like Ansel Adams when they probably don't have a clue that half the gear they use today probably wouldn't exist if it weren't for the hard work and study and years of trial and error he and others like him did to make it possible.



haha... i bet i know where THAT came from...


----------



## mrodgers

Luxowell said:


> Mine, as mentioned by others before, it the level of snobbery some people can have with their equipment.  I know people who don't shoot canon and never say a word, and I know some people who are great, until they spend an hour telling my how much better their Nikon is.
> Really?  That's great.  I'm happy for you.  Now, could we talk about something that isn't going to make me hate you?


I thought about this type of stuff that goes on in internet forums (not specific to photography by any means) while watching Saturday's New Jersey at Pittsburgh hockey game.  Ty Conklin (the other goalie) was sitting in the corner with a headset on talking to FSN Pittsburgh's commentators with the camera on him quite a lot.  Sitting there in front of Conklin with lenses sticking through the hole in the glass was 2 photographers.  You could see them the whole time chatting it up, laughing, and having a good time.  One had a big ole white Canon lens, the other you could clearly see Nikon plastered above the lens on the body.  They were having a good ole time chatting the whole game.


----------



## The_Traveler

> AND SPELLING DOESNT COUNT IN THE REAL WORLD!



You are probably correct - oh, and could you supersize the fries?

The original quote was meant sarcastically, I think, but this seems to typify the attitude of some posters.
It make them look ignorant or careless - or perhaps it is just revealing.


----------



## shorty6049

mrodgers said:


> I thought about this type of stuff that goes on in internet forums (not specific to photography by any means) while watching Saturday's New Jersey at Pittsburgh hockey game.  Ty Conklin (the other goalie) was sitting in the corner with a headset on talking to FSN Pittsburgh's commentators with the camera on him quite a lot.  Sitting there in front of Conklin with lenses sticking through the hole in the glass was 2 photographers.  You could see them the whole time chatting it up, laughing, and having a good time.  One had a big ole white Canon lens, the other you could clearly see Nikon plastered above the lens on the body.  They were having a good ole time chatting the whole game.



people are a lot better about it in real life than they are on the internet. In the real world, we're all just photographers, but on the internet, oh man.... you're the nikon guy. Whatever your opinion of something is in real life, multiply it by about 10 , and you get a lot of people's attitudes online. for example- "i would NEVER go back to a PC" or "I will NEVER shop at walmart, they're EVIL!" . Who really cares? when it comes to real life, things just arent as big of a deal as people like to make them.


----------



## Lacey Anne

shorty6049 said:


> "I will NEVER shop at walmart, they're EVIL!" .


Nope, on this one and only this one... I'm like that in real life. You can ask anyone who knows me! lol! I'm very passionate about certain things.


----------



## shorty6049

yea, i figured someone would say that, the walmart thing is something people have really strong opinions about for some reason, i kind of thought it might have been a bad example but everyone just kept saying the same thing over and over again like they were the first person who ever said it or something so i figured i'd add it in there. i hope i didnt quote you directly or anything, it was meant to be a generalization


----------



## Battou

Ajay said:


> "I like this photo, _*I'm not sure why*_..."
> 
> Pick a reason!



:lmao:, I've gotten one of those before


----------



## mrodgers

shorty6049 said:


> people are a lot better about it in real life than they are on the internet. In the real world, we're all just photographers, but on the internet, oh man.... you're the nikon guy. Whatever your opinion of something is in real life, multiply it by about 10 , and you get a lot of people's attitudes online. for example- "i would NEVER go back to a PC" or "I will NEVER shop at walmart, they're EVIL!" . Who really cares? when it comes to real life, things just arent as big of a deal as people like to make them.


Ah yes, very true.  People are much different with the anominous (kill me now if that is spelled wrong ) of the internet.

And I'm with Lacy on Walmart.  I try as hard as possible not to shop there.  Their customer service is unbelievable.

Oh, and I'll never buy a Sony product ever again as well.  I've never seen so many problems with a particular brand as I've seen with Sony.  Back in the 80's and early 90's, Sony was tops.  I'll state and argue both of these statements IRL as well as on the internet as well


----------



## usayit

Ah ... just realized another one...

The terms...

"pro-hobbiest", "prosumer"... or whatever they can come up with to term more-than-amateur-but-not-quite-professional.

I've been shooting for a long time... I consider myself pretty advanced and well knowledgeable...  I've even shot a few events and assisted in weddings.  But I"m not going to go around fooling myself... I'm a enthusiast, amateur, or hobbyest.  I don't make a living from it therefore I am not a professional.

In my book, you are one or the other.. not kinda in the middle

In my book, professional doesn't necessarily mean better than the next amateur.

In my book, professional level camera doesn't equal professional photographer.

there....


----------



## Tiberius47

Gah, I can't imagine how many people are out there with a Canon 1DS mk III, with several 580EX mk II flashes, a bunch of L series lenses, carbon fiber tripods, image stablised lenses, photoshop CS3 and all that and saying, "Yeah, I can get pro quality photos.  Now what's aperture priority?"


----------



## Lacey Anne

Tiberius47 said:


> Gah, I can't imagine how many people are out there with a Canon 1DS mk III, with several 580EX mk II flashes, a bunch of L series lenses, carbon fiber tripods, image stablised lenses, photoshop CS3 and all that and saying, "Yeah, I can get pro quality photos. Now what's aperture priority?"


----------



## abraxas

"I'm sorry, but this photo..."

WTF are they 'sorry' about?  I shot the shot without them in mind, for myself.  If they were there bothering me with their nagging and advice I would have *****-slapped them to the point they were 'sorry' they didn't wait in the car.


----------



## Clutch

JerryPH said:


> I go out of my way to respect ANY person holding a camera up to take the shot, but it burns me when someone walks in front of me without caring even after they SEE ME.
> 
> I thank them for the courtesy and try agian.
> 
> I once "thanked" a miss prissy 3 times before her husband physically pulled her aside, apologized to me and told her to stop being a *****... lol.
> 
> I sincerely thanked him for his courtesy and smiled, but made no more of it than that.  I took my shot quickly and moved on.



I had something like that happen once. So I started blasting away shot after shot of the offending, discourteous man. He said to me, "I didn't give you permission to take my picture!". I simply replied, "Then stay out of my frame." I think I confused him. By the way, I didn't find a single shot of him to be very good. A camera as a weapon... go figure. I tell ya, sometimes I get a kick out of being such a smart a**!


----------



## shorty6049

mrodgers said:


> Oh, and I'll never buy a Sony product ever again as well.  I've never seen so many problems with a particular brand as I've seen with Sony.  Back in the 80's and early 90's, Sony was tops.  I'll state and argue both of these statements IRL as well as on the internet as well



Aw come on. Sony isnt THAT bad...
I  have had minor problems with pretty much any piece of electronic equipment i've owned not just sony. I'm on my 3rd sony digicam right now (2nd SLR) and i love it dearly. AND i've had a ps3 since last july and still no issues. 

I had a toshiba laptop that was ALWAYS having problems though... I dont think its the company as much as just the individual item you bought. 
i'm not trying to argue with you or anything, because i'm sure you've had problems with sony stuff, but thats like if i came on here and told everyone that i'd never buy anything from canon because they suck. I'd have about 10 people on my back. So you're lucky Sony users are still in the minority!


----------



## mrodgers

shorty6049 said:


> Aw come on. Sony isnt THAT bad...
> I  have had minor problems with pretty much any piece of electronic equipment i've owned not just sony. I'm on my 3rd sony digicam right now (2nd SLR) and i love it dearly. AND i've had a ps3 since last july and still no issues.


I had a Sony CD headunit in my old truck.  Two months old and I spent an entire month trying to get sony to replace it since it was broke (the buttons all did a different function than they were suppose to, example press play and the radio came on, or hit a station preset and the volume turned up..). My truck was broken into and it was stolen before I could get Sony to replace it.  Funny part was, the face plate buttons had died completely by then and I had to use the remote to change anything.  They stole a radio that didn't work at all because they didn't steal the remote.

My mother-in-law has been through 2 very expensive Sony televisions in shorter amount of time that I've had my Magnavox that I purchased in 1996.  I still use that 27 inch TV and it still looks better than any widescreen not running HD that I have seen.

Every single portable radio that I or a family member has owned of Sony's has quit working on the CD player part.  My wife had one when we got married.  Her brother had one when my wife and I got married.  My mother had 2, one upstairs and one downstairs, both the CD quit working.  I bought a Sony compact digital camera just before this past Christmas and it took the worst pictures I had ever seen (yes, it was a point and shoot).  

Conversely, I do have the very first multi-disk trunk mounted car CD player to come out (I'm pretty sure).  It is a Sony.  I bought it in 1991 and installed it in the back of a 1985 Ford Escort.  Scratch that, I placed it in the trunk, I never mounted it.  It slid around everywhere back there.  It was moved into my first brand new car.  Then it got wedged under the front seat of my 1989 Toyota Pickup truck.  An accident sent the CD player flying around the footwell and ejected the CD magazine.  I had to tear it all apart to get my CD out that was playing.  From there it went into 3 more Toyota 4x4s.  All 4 of those trucks were very heavily 4wheeled.  From 1991 through 2007, it was installed and removed from 6 vehicles, it looks like it went through a war, it had countless beers spilled on it (from my younger and more stupid days), yet it is currently sitting in my garage waiting to install into my current hand-me-down car from the wife.  It has never been cleaned, and has been through ****, but I know this summer when I install it in my current car, it will NOT ever skip even after 16 years.

Sony just doesn't make their products like they use to.  That old CD player has 270,000 miles on it and it still keeps working flawlessly.


----------



## shorty6049

wow.... that sucks. Sony has always been good to me luckily. Their DSLRS are great so far, and that (and my ps3) is what counts for me at least. i guess everyones experience is different though. The one bad experience i had with a toshiba laptop caused me to never want to buy one again, even though my dad owns one thats probably about 4 years old right now and still running fine (although a little slow) . I think any company as big as Sony is bound to make some really great, reliable products, as well as some really awful unreliable ones as well. I wont defend them or anything because why should i care what people think of them? i'm done talking now. lol


----------



## easily_amused

shorty6049 said:


> Who really cares? when it comes to real life, things just aren't as big of a deal as people like to make them.



You should hang out on parenting forums.  The things that get people's collective panties all wadded up is just hysterical.


----------



## sabbath999

The_Traveler said:


> Can we all agree than Canon has one 'n'?



No... not all cannons have one m...


----------



## shorty6049

haha, wouldn't it be a little wierd for me to be hanging out on parenting forums? but now that you mention it, i kind of want to take a look! lol


----------



## Jus7 A Phas3

Well my current photography pet peave is having to wait for my 10.5 to come:]


----------



## Frequent Traveler

Photography "pet peeve"

Hmmm. 

1) people who give a "standing ovation" compliment to a photo of marginal quality taken on an inexpensive camera, then criticize me for spending $$$ on my dSLR even when the same people admit my images are vastly superior to the cr*p they just praised. (this has happened on a couple of occasions)

2) "that camera must take great pictures"

3) he/she has a great "eye" for picture taking when the photo's being referenced are admittedly accidently arrived at

4) related to 2) above - criticize me for spending $$$ on photography, then ask me for images or if will take some photos for them/their children/ etc (OK, my wife is primarily guilty of this!!!)

PS - i list my equipment on my signature so folks who are like minded may be more inclined to join in the conversation at hand...


----------



## easily_amused

shorty6049 said:


> haha, wouldn't it be a little wierd for me to be hanging out on parenting forums? but now that you mention it, i kind of want to take a look! lol



No kids, shorty?

I don't post much, just read for trainwrecky goodness.  I am still the horrible mother who was eating M&Ms one day, dropped one and her 11 month old got and ate it before she could.  You would think I just killed her from the way people reacted.  She's almost 6 now, so I figure it is all good. ;P

EVERYTHING that is not someone's idea of *perfect* is child neglect and abusive, don'tcha know!? Don't have a $250 car seat?  You are horrible and neglectful!!11!!  Don't have kids you can't afford blah blah...  Let's not get into the whole breastfeeding/ cloth diapering/ co-sleeping/ natural child birth/ stay at home vs working  nonsense.   Oh how I :heart:  the mommy wars....or not.

Feel free to make a donation to my child's future therapy needs.  She will need it according to some LMAO.


----------



## onedayillknowbetter

It bugs me when people take pictures straight on of something behind a glass wall with the flash on, in a museum or something...  As if that thing were worth taking a picture of anyway, now you'll just get to see all the fat people looking at a bright light.

but I think most of all, it's when I show someone a picture I just took of them, and they say "Wow! Your camera is awesome!"
....Well, uh...Canon says thanks but I say Ef You??


----------



## Luxowell

Frequent Traveler said:


> Photography "pet peeve"
> 
> 2) "that camera must take great pictures"


 
I don't let that one bother me too much.  People who aren't into photography see updates in point and shoot cameras, which do make taking a better photo easier, and just think that an dSLR must just do everything for you.

The simple way to dispel this is to start talking about photography like you would one of your photo buddies.  3 seconds after you say the words "well, in manual mode, when I go 2 stops down on the shutter..." they will get this glazed over look on their face and realize it ain't as easy as they think.  I got to watch my brother look REALLY confused when he wanted to try out my camera when I had a 50mm prime lens on it.  "what the F?  this thing doesn't zoom?!?!? What good is that?!?!".

I guess it's like if I were to go up to one of my friends who rides bikes and saying "wow, that bike looks fast" and him looking at me and saying "no, my legs are fast"


----------



## kellylindseyphotography

easily_amused said:


> No kids, shorty?
> 
> I don't post much, just read for trainwrecky goodness. I am still the horrible mother who was eating M&Ms one day, dropped one and her 11 month old got and ate it before she could. You would think I just killed her from the way people reacted. She's almost 6 now, so I figure it is all good. ;P
> 
> EVERYTHING that is not someone's idea of *perfect* is child neglect and abusive, don'tcha know!? Don't have a $250 car seat? You are horrible and neglectful!!11!! Don't have kids you can't afford blah blah... Let's not get into the whole breastfeeding/ cloth diapering/ co-sleeping/ natural child birth/ stay at home vs working nonsense. Oh how I :heart: the mommy wars....or not.
> 
> Feel free to make a donation to my child's future therapy needs. She will need it according to some LMAO.


 
*snort* where do you hail from?  Gotta love parenting messaging boards.  I was banned from my original birth board.  It happens when your a loud mouth that goes against the grain of the "perfect moms" :lmao:


----------



## easily_amused

KELLY, 

I'd rather not say as I like to keep my forums separate.  They are all the same, anyway.

Come sit on the bad mommy bench with me.  It is nice and comfy, especially when you don't have a stick shoved up your butt.


----------



## kellylindseyphotography

Passing the popcorn!  Glad someone's keeping my seat warm on that couch   Would be funny if we "knew" each other


----------



## fadingaway1986

ON People thinking SLR's do everything for you


We used to sell one SLR at work, and a girl came in one day, all showing off that she was looking at a "good" camera and thought she was so great...

So she's there looking through the SLR and she asks "why isn't it zooming?" 

me: "ummm because you have to turn the lens at the front"

her: ":O I thought this camera was fully automatic!!!"

me: umm no, you still have to zoom it yourself.

so she puts her hand on the lens and starts adjusting the "zoom" (which was actually the focus) with the Auto lock on. 


Ugh. that was painful. Needless to say, she didn't buy it. 

(infact, I boxed it up, put it behind the counter and bought it myself)


----------



## easily_amused

kellylindseyphotography said:


> Passing the popcorn!  Glad someone's keeping my seat warm on that couch   Would be funny if we "knew" each other



Heh, it would be. 

mmmmmm.  popcorn!  Extra butter, of course!


----------



## KristinaS

I'm sure this was noted in some variation or another, but my biggest photography pet peeve ever is people who do not even know how to properly use their cameras, but have their own photography Web sites and businesses actually charging people for their crap. 

When I see a thread on here that someone has posted asking for pp help on a severely under or overexposed, out of focus image from a shoot that they have recently done for pay, it makes me so mad.


----------



## shorty6049

KristinaS said:


> I'm sure this was noted in some variation or another, but my biggest photography pet peeve ever is people who do not even know how to properly use their cameras, but have their own photography Web sites and businesses actually charging people for their crap.
> 
> When I see a thread on here that someone has posted asking for pp help on a severely under or overexposed, out of focus image from a shoot that they have recently done for pay, it makes me so mad.



i know exactly what you mean.
http://www.rexnjoku.com/rex_njoku_photography.html


----------



## Lyncca

shorty6049 said:


> i know exactly what you mean.
> http://www.rexnjoku.com/rex_njoku_photography.html



That looks like a personal site to me.  I see nothing wrong with posting pics (bad or not) on your personal website.... It is charging outlandish prices for bad pictures that is the bad part.


----------



## shorty6049

yea, i should have been more clear. it probably is a personal site, but most of the photos were posted in a facebook album with the description ="New passion and business. If you want the original pixes or posters. Let me know and I'll tell you what price."   so i'm assuming hes trying to sell them. I dont want to get down on him for trying or anything, but i think it had something to do with him having the job as "photo editor" for our yearbook at my university


----------



## Lyncca

shorty6049 said:


> yea, i should have been more clear. it probably is a personal site, but most of the photos were posted in a facebook album with the description ="New passion and business. If you want the original pixes or posters. Let me know and I'll tell you what price."   so i'm assuming hes trying to sell them. I dont want to get down on him for trying or anything, but i think it had something to do with him having the job as "photo editor" for our yearbook at my university



Gotcha


----------



## Village Idiot

My pet peeve is when the people at Ritz have to print the two pictures I wanted off a second time because they couldn't get the order right the first time.

I also don't like when people pee in my cheerios.


----------



## shorty6049

i went to ritz in january, and they were absolutely convinced that there was no such thing as reverse macro, and that me and my brother didnt know what we were talking about asking for a step ring for it...


----------



## KristinaS

KristinaS said:


> I'm sure this was noted in some variation or another, but my biggest photography pet peeve ever is people who do not even know how to properly use their cameras, but have their own photography Web sites and businesses actually charging people for their crap.
> 
> When I see a thread on here that someone has posted asking for pp help on a severely under or overexposed, out of focus image from a shoot that they have recently done for pay, it makes me so mad.



I should clarify that I mean Web sites promoting their business, not people that have personal Web sites to showcase their work.


----------



## Tiberius47

KristinaS said:


> I'm sure this was noted in some variation or another, but my biggest photography pet peeve ever is people who do not even know how to properly use their cameras, but have their own photography Web sites and businesses actually charging people for their crap.



Q:  How do you take a portrait?

My answer:  Set your camera to Aperture mode, marked with an A on the mode dial (sometimes it is Av), and set a value that is fairly low, around 2.8 or 3.5.  This will kmake sure that the person is sharp but the background is nicely blurred so it isn't distracting.  Then focus on the eyes and take the photo.  If needed, use a reflector to fill in any shadows with a bit of light, or use a flash.  Off camera flash is best for this, as it gives a more natural result.

Their answer:  Uh, you turn it to the little picture of the guy, yeah?


----------



## The_Traveler

Village Idiot said:


> I also don't like when people pee in my cheerios.



Oh.  I sure wish I had read this earlier this AM.
Sorry.
It's sterile, you know.


----------



## Socrates

The_Traveler said:


> Oh. I sure wish I had read this earlier this AM.
> Sorry.
> It's sterile, you know.


 
I don't think that sterility is the issue.


----------



## The_Traveler

Socrates said:


> I don't think that sterility is the issue.



Well, I don't want to add injury to insult.


----------



## Village Idiot

Socrates said:


> I don't think that sterility is the issue.


 
It's just not kosher.


----------



## Don Kondra

Uh, not to change the subject but 

Two peeves come to mind....

One word topic titles and a picture, no explanation whatsoever?

Sorry, even in the right section it's not enough information for me to even bother looking..

And my absolute favorite, ta da....

Six or more HUGE files, no numbering, no information.

I have lately been blessed with a reasonably high speed connection but...

Do they think the picture will look better if it's a 5 mg file???

Ahhhhh, thanx. Now back to your regularly scheduled program.

Cheers, Don


----------



## JerryPH

The_Traveler said:


> It's sterile, you know.


 
I hear that sterility is what happens after being kicked in the gonads a few times? 

KristinaS touched on a new pet peeve of mine... "pros" not being very knowledgeable about the basics, and asking here or some other public forum. My first desire is to tell them that their pro-level camera doesn't really make them much of a "pro".


----------



## Unreal Tuner

People thinking that its the camera that takes good pictures. Like many of you have said earlier, its the person not the camera. 

People thinking that you can't take good photos with a p&s camera. Sometimes there are a few people that have really nice cameras and they act smug when someone has a p&s.



JerryPH said:


> KristinaS touched on a new pet peeve of mine... "pros" not being very knowledgeable about the basics, and asking here or some other public forum. My first desire is to tell them that their pro-level camera doesn't really make them much of a "pro".


 

haha..this one too


----------



## jvgig

At my high school, many of the students in the b&w film photography class feel the need to take their already very visually appealing and feeling evoking images and take some paint or scissors or whatever other junk they can find and put random shapes/items on the pictures.  It takes a very nice picture that I would hang on my wall and turns it into some piece of "creative" expression that no one can appreciate.  I have even asked some of the students what they were trying to accomplish and almost exclusively their answer is "I just wanted to try something."  If you have a reason for adding some feature to your image then great, but just doing it over and over again just to try it shows no artistic ability and actually detracts from the visual experience.  Never try the same experiment twice expecting to get different results.


----------



## Emerana

*I have a forum pet peeve!*
*When someone places up a photo in a gallery, presumably for C&C (without any specifics ie these are snapshots or please dont comment on my expression) and then are very offended by honest opinions. Taking a photo down because two people didn't like something about it. Insulting the reviewer when they took their time to give feedback. No wonder so many people look but not review!*


----------



## LeftyRodriguez

jvgig said:


> At my high school, many of the students in the b&w film photography class feel the need to take their already very visually appealing and feeling evoking images and take some paint or scissors or whatever other junk they can find and put random shapes/items on the pictures.  It takes a very nice picture that I would hang on my wall and turns it into some piece of "creative" expression that no one can appreciate.  I have even asked some of the students what they were trying to accomplish and almost exclusively their answer is "I just wanted to try something."  If you have a reason for adding some feature to your image then great, but just doing it over and over again just to try it shows no artistic ability and actually detracts from the visual experience.  Never try the same experiment twice expecting to get different results.



I hate this kind of thing as well.  Also, I've noticed a lot of students distressing their prints by scratching them and whatnot.  I've even seen some scratch their negs, which strikes me as really stupid, in that you can't recover from that.


----------



## Parago

Not sure if this has been mentioned yet:

When I have to explain, again, that in order to create a 8x10 print from my images, some cropping NATURALLY is neccessary. "Yeah but.. then I have to either crop the head off or the feet' .. yea, duh. That's why we all hate 8x10 prints!!  (Who in the world ever came up with that, anyways???)

Some people just dont understand the 'format' or 'ratio' concept itself and it's driving me nuts every time.


----------



## The_Traveler

Parago said:


> Not sure if this has been mentioned yet:
> 
> When I have to explain, again, that in order to create a 8x10 print from my images, some cropping NATURALLY is neccessary. "Yeah but.. then I have to either crop the head off or the feet' .. yea, duh. That's why we all hate 8x10 prints!!  (Who in the world ever came up with that, anyways???)
> 
> Some people just dont understand the 'format' or 'ratio' concept itself and it's driving me nuts every time.



Since the US and Canada have settled on the 8 x 10 as the standard size, why don't you shoot with this aspect ratio in mind?  IMO, most portrait slooks infinitely better in 4x5 rather than 4 x 6.


----------



## Parago

The_Traveler said:


> Since the US and Canada have settled on the 8 x 10 as the standard size, why don't you shoot with this aspect ratio in mind? IMO, most portrait slooks infinitely better in 4x5 rather than 4 x 6.


 
You think so? I dont know, I really like the 4x6 ratio. For me personally it's either 4x6 or square. Plus.. 4x6 images are still the one size prints I sell the most (about 60% of all picture orders are 4x6) so all I would do is turn the dilemma around and force them to crop off the sides. Same difference. 

I usually end up selling the 8x12 and have the customer have it custom framed.


----------



## iflynething

When people think their brand is the best.............and

People who have this great equipment, nice lens, but don't know what in the HELL they are doing

I work at Wolf Camera. This guy comes in there. "My subject is not in focus." I take one look in the viewfinder and it's out of focus. I don't mess with it and say is that viewfinder in focus. I focus the viewfinder and give it back to him and I'm like is that better. He's like oh yeah. Now I don't remember the focal length on this lens but it was a 2.8. Kinda long and black but it was on an XTi body. Nothing wrong with that but I was like your viewfinder is out of focus and that's why you're not getting the best shots. Well we keep talking and he was wanting to know how to set it up on spot focus where he could change around the focus spot. 

I looked through the menus for a second and at this point, my manager comes over and I'm like I'm sorry but I'm not that familiar with Canon. He said exactly this "I guess you shoot Nikon, you must be a SNOB!!" 

I was dumbfounded. I let my manager finish this.

I just hate it when people come in the store and don't know what they're doing yet they have thousands and thousands of dollars worth of equipment.

GEEZ!!

~Michael~


----------



## obsessivephotographer

onedayillknowbetter said:


> but I think most of all, it's when I show someone a picture I just took of them, and they say "Wow! Your camera is awesome!"
> ....Well, uh...Canon says thanks but I say Ef You??



 I'm going to have to remember that one.


----------



## taracor

Oh lets see here..

-Idiots who reach a hand in front of my lens (purposely, mind you) just as I'm taking the shot.  Makes me want to cut that hand off..

-People who ask to take a look at my camera, then run around with it loosely holding it by the strap.  I don't care if we're friends, you don't do that kind of crap!

-Newbies who are ignorant and think they are always right.  You know the kind, they just get their first DSLR, and they say "I wanna buy that lens"  and show you some massive focal length like..F12 lens.  "So...what are you taking pictures of that requires that thing?"  "Like flowers and stuff.."  So you show them a better quality, less expensive lens that is better for..'flowers and stuff' and they get all mad and say "no I need that, you don't know what you're talking about".  Unless you're shooting flowers located on the other side of the city, you don't need that thing.. seriously.

-Dial up internet, and the cost of broadband.

-This goes to the ignorant newbies example "Hmm this says it was at 1/300.  That's bad, my camera can do much better"  When the photo is not blurry.  I explained, "Ok faster shutter speed is not always better, the photo isn't blurry"  then they don't want to admit they are wrong and just ramble on.  "Hmm..it can still do better"

-This is a quote from family guy, but I like it "Oooh you took a black and white picture of a lawn chair with its shadow.  Aren't you so dark and brooding"  Well those people.  Seriously..  the ones that take some awful, awful, picture and claim its so..artistic and wonderful.  

-Sensor dust

-Stuck on sensor dust

-'Myspace pictures'


----------



## Jus7 A Phas3

MYSPACE!!


----------



## JimmyO

I know its a popular one, but i hate it when people make a connection between expensive or extensive equipment and the picture. Especially after they see a pic and say, geez i really need one of "those" cameras


----------



## Miaow

I agree with the sensor dust lol


----------



## Phazan

*Swicth to your 10mm, and notice that a UFO just flew over you when you just had your 400mm on*


----------



## RacePhoto

I'm not allowed to have pets here, and I'm sure that includes peeves.


----------



## Josh66

People that insist that the 35mm throw-away (you know, the cardboard single use ones) cameras "take the best pictures", but they only think that because they have no clue how to use their camera, or it has a 15 second shutter lag and it's impossible to get a decent pic out of it.


----------



## Jedo_03

(1) People who spell "peeve" with an 'ea' instead of the (correct) 'ee'
(2) - daren't say, as it would upset SO many people on here - and probably get me banned...
Jedo


----------



## Parago

I have a new one.. poop diapers! :mrgreen:

Third time in a row clients come to the studio and little one just took a dump in the car so of course we need to change that on my couch. 

(Yes, I'm only half way serious - I have a toddler myself so I know they can be unpredictable - bowel movements included. Still.. ew.)


----------



## The_Traveler

taracor said:


> the ones that take some awful, awful, picture and claim its so..artistic and wonderful.


 
Absolutely. Those who mistake lack of technical ability for artiness.

and the reverse, those who think that pictures that are
technically OK are good just because they are well exposed and well focussed.  NOT every picture of people in BW is photojournalism.


----------



## Early

Not really a peeve, but people from the US spelling 'color' with a u.


----------



## Early

Rusty105 said:


> -Rising cost of film development
> 
> Thanks


Ah, yeah!  Rising costs and lower quality!:x


----------



## daluke09

My lack of skill!


----------



## BoblyBill

Battou said:


> Power lines and cables


+1,000,000,000


----------



## molsen

i hate when people come up to me when i'm shooting an event or scene and say "what is that?  oh it's just a nikon D50..."  or something about it being nikon instead of canon or something other stupid, ignorant, baseless comparison

i just laugh, because the proof is in the pudding


----------



## saltface

AndersonPhoto said:


> People and their flashes drive me nuts!  I, too, saw people taking pictures of the moon with their flash...


Mebbe their flash IS that good...

I hate photographers that look offended when you ask if they used HDR on an otherwise highly improbable shot.


----------



## Neuner

I can't stand when people ask if a well executed photo was processed as an HDR.  It's rather insulting.


----------



## Varuna

I can't STAND it when people get in front of me or bump/push me while I'm trying to shoot. I tried to shoot at a car show a little while ago, and 200 shots resulted in 15 _decent _pictures. People with no regard for someone taking a picture can go die in a fire.

When I showed a friend my dSLR, he uttered the infamous "Wow, that must take awesome pictures! I just replied with "Only when I show it how." He was confused, and figured out what I meant 10 minutes later.

Brand wars.

Airport security guards who assume my camera MUST BE A WEAPON!!! just because it's in two pieces, and go into a frenzy over my luggage.

Little kids who think that if my camera makes a noise, they will _definitely_ show up on the back of it (the LCD), and therefor reach for my camera, slathering the lens with mac & cheese or whatever ungodly mess they've been wading in, in a desperate attempt to view the back of the camera.


----------



## ZacMan1987

"What kind of camera do you have?"
"How much did it cost?"
"Wow that's a lot, but it does such great things with your pictures!"

^Actual chat transcript from 2 weeks ago...^

Oh, and the ever classy "P&S at arm's length" shot, not to be confused with the "P&S in the bathroom mirror" shot.


----------



## The_Traveler

ZacMan1987 said:


> Oh, and the ever classy "P&S at arm's length" shot, not to be confused with the "P&S in the bathroom mirror" shot.



This is the famous P&S shot taken by the PitA person.


----------



## LaFoto

ZacMan1987 said:


> "P&S in the bathroom mirror" shot.


 
How about those with the flash up and on??? 
They are going to be THE successful self-portrait! For sure.


----------



## Jus7 A Phas3

Im in highschool still and this happen to me today at break. This kid asked me what kind of camrea i have and i said i have a nikon D80 and he was like is that good and before i said anything my freind was like has like a $500 fisheye (not that, that makes the camera good) but then the kid was like well I have a $1,000 camera and its 10.2 megapixels and i was alright, is it an SLR and he says i dont know is that the good kind and i was said obviously you know nothing about cameras and i walked away. That bugs me, like he was trying to one up me for no reason at all which was lame.


----------



## saltface

Neuner said:


> I can't stand when people ask if a well executed photo was processed as an HDR. It's rather insulting.


 
You know what I'm talking about.
Things like dawn catching the tops of the mountains and brightly lit flowers in the valley below.


----------



## Harmony

One of my pet peeves (not necessarily a photo one) is having to spend 5 minutes deciphering a forum post. 

However, some of my photography pet peeves:
> people who use the flash at everything
> people who put the camera back into the bag while on. (This happened to me awhile ago. I tried to get the man's attention (he had a XT) but he just walked away. I think he was used to point and shoots because he held the SLR with the first two fingers of his hands. I've seen lots of people hold point and shoots this way. I'm actually surprised he could take a picture while only supporting it with 4 fingers!)
> Brand wars! I'm one of 2 Nikon shooters in my whole church. Everyone else (approximately 10-12 people) gangs up on him and me, trying to convince us to switch. It's pathetic, really.

And one not-pet-peeve. I love handing the D200 to someone when they ask to try and getting it back 10 seconds later because "it has no dial-turny-thing." (Mode buttons are best inventions in the world!)


----------



## ThePup

I Hate it when I'm going through a days shots, find a few that really stand out and I think "That's really nice, I like that", then I come to places like this, look at everyone elses shots, and realise just how bad mine are!


----------



## shorty6049

ha, amen to that!


----------



## bhendjol

People staring at You.


----------



## The_Traveler

I was just watching a sporting event on tv and, as the camera panned across the crowd, there were hundreds of little flashes as people hopefully pressed the buttons on their P&S and I thought to myself,"each of those flashes marks a moron."


----------



## Seefutlung

The_Traveler said:


> I was just watching a sporting event on tv and, as the camera panned across the crowd, there were hundreds of little flashes as people hopefully pressed the buttons on their P&S and I thought to myself,"each of those flashes marks a moron."


 
Maybe it was a "Back of the Head" contest ...


----------



## ukreal1

NJMAN said:


> I know why it irritates me too. Its an expression that idiots use when they don't care about something or have no interest in something, when the proper usage should be "I couldn't care less". But that's American colloquialism for you.  Okay, so this is a bit off topic, so I will return you to your regularly scheduled programming.



off topic too, but I hate "look it". It is "look at it". My kids started doing it and I stopped them right in their tracks, it just sounds terrible.
Anyway, I get annoyed with camera snobbery, so what if I _only_ have a D70, I still take good photos, because I care about my composition, etc, while I am taking the photo (although, I have to say that I do tilted horizons _on purpose_)...)

my next peeve is 'photoshop this, photoshop that' I HATE photoshop, I tried and can't fathom it out one bit, this is more to do with me than PS I am sure. I wish I could use it so I could join in the discussions LOL...But seriously, as a photography, do you have to use photoshop, what about picnik, picasa, OK now I am waffling...time to go to bed!


----------



## shorty6049

Thought of a  new one. When I'm on flickr and someone takes a bunch of decent photos and turns them all "artsy" by applying so many actions, or rounding the corners (ooo, creative, its an old photo now!) or turning a photo of a beautiful colorful flower into something drab and unappealing, and they get 20 comments on their stuff saying "This is beautiful!" and I actually try to keep my work true-to-life, and get a comment per month... GRR!


----------



## BoblyBill

shorty6049 said:


> Thought of a new one. When I'm on flickr and someone takes a bunch of decent photos and turns them all "artsy" by applying so many actions, or rounding the corners (ooo, creative, its an old photo now!) or turning a photo of a beautiful colorful flower into something drab and unappealing, and they get 20 comments on their stuff saying "This is beautiful!" and I actually try to keep my work true-to-life, and get a comment per month... GRR!


 
You get a comment once a month? I'm lucky if I get one a year it seems.


----------



## The_Traveler

shorty6049 said:


> When I'm on flickr and



This is the root of your problem.
Just like my mother used to tell me, 'don't hand around in bad neighborhoods.'


----------



## KD5NRH

Battou said:


> My Sure shot the flash is by default off and must be turned on manually, wile my C-743 is by default on, once turned off it stays off and my T-3D the flash is by default on and needs to be turned off manually with each shot taken.....Needless to say I have taken a hand full of shots with an unwanted flash with both the C series and T-3D :blushing:



That's my main pet peeve with my little Samsung S730; every time you turn it on, it defaults to auto-flash.  IMO, since there's "off" and "on", "auto" should at least default to off when the AF focuses at infinity.  If I want fill on stuff outside the AF focus area, I can turn it on manually, but since I use it a lot for security work, I'd rather not have anything alerting whoever I'm watching most of the time.

If I want them to know I'm watching, I have a taclight, or I can lug out the Minolta and fire off its 5200i at full blast and full zoom.

And, in defense of the "flash photos of the moon" crowd, using a little flash with a long exposure of the moon to paint in the trees is a valid use.  Not what any of them were trying for, I suspect.


----------



## maytay20

> I just hate it when I have set up a shot and people with the dinky p*s cameras step in front and start firing off their little flashes ruining my photo or making me wait. Esp. when I know their photo isn't going to turn out


I just added a section in my contract about this very thing.  We already have a tight time limit, just let me do what I am here for already.  


> I have taken photos from the car if I really really want it. Not as much anymore but I did a lot when I first started. Cause you know, to get out of the car means taking 2 kids, a diaper bag, a stroller out, wiping sticking fingers or changing a poopy diaper then fighting the to get them back in again because they want to play. Some people arent lazy


If you get out they get out.  Sometime that is not a option on a busy street.


> another one: people who say "ooohhh take a photo of that" - and you know that there is no way in hell that you would get a reasonable picture out of that. Sure it looks pretty, but it ain't gonna expose properly... and they just can't understand why you don't wanna take the photo


Even my DH is guilty of this one.  But this has stopped from him since I told him what lens I would need to be able to take a shot of a tiny bird 20 feet up in a tree. :lmao:


> criticize me for spending $$$ on photography, then ask me for images or if will take some photos for them/their children/ etc (OK, my wife is primarily guilty of this!!!)


My family does this.  They will show up unannounced expecting my in home studio to be set up and ready to go at a moments notice.  


> i went to ritz in January, and they were absolutely convinced that there was no such thing as reverse macro, and that me and my brother didn't know what we were talking about asking for a step ring for it...


I will drive three hours to avoid this.  


> people who put the camera back into the bag while on


I am guilty of this but it is usually to get one of my kids from being killed or injured.  :x

My latest is the place I work at they will ask me to take all kinds of random photos of stuff.  Then when I ask for money for the photos they don't want them anymore.  I tried leaving my camera at home but then I just saw too much I wanted pictures of.


----------



## peterbj7

KD5NRH said:


> Samsung S730; every time you turn it on, it defaults to auto-flash


I don't know about the S730, but my L85 also defaults to "flash on" (actually red eye) if I turn it on in Auto mode.  So I don't.  I turn it to "Program" and then it retains any setting I want it to have.  Once it's on I can then select other manual or auto modes if I want to, but leaving it in Program mode means it's ready for immediate use - and the flash won't go off.

This has basically been true for every P&S I've ever owned.


----------



## onedayillknowbetter

Amateurs new to SLR photography who just up the contrast on EVERY SINGLE PICTURE they take, then call the album "art".  Pumping the contrast helps P&S photos, but only stresses how little you know about taking a picture when paired with a SLR photo.

I'm like everyone else, and I'm pretty sure I've posted it too, but so many people have seen my photos recently and said, "WOW!  Your photos turn out so nice, what kind of camera is that?"  AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH  makes me want to pull out my hair!!!!!!!  

I take pictures at parties a lot, many times putting them on my website and giving people business cards to find the photos.  I don't like to call myself a photographer, because there's always at least 5 other girls running around with their P&Shoots calling themselves photographers.  I think in order to call yourself a photographer, you need to know how to adjust settings to make a picture look good, pushing a button makes you a button pusher, not a photographer.


----------



## trunion

dpolston said:


> I've been waiting for a thread like this! I have a few (some have been mentioned)
> 
> I think my number one pet peeve are the people that discredit taking professional portraits and quality work (and you know the level of work I'm talking about) as "ppppfftttt... anybody can do take that!" General dismissal of everything we try to do like technique, DOF, rule of thirds, composition, lighting... the list goes on! I don't generally shoot "snapshots"!



I totally agree with this one, to add to it, those people who want a great portrait but think you should charge Walmart prices.


----------



## Carmel

My Pet Peeves...

I've had my fair share of p&c's... from the Kodak [FONT=arial,helvetica][FONT=arial,helvetica][SIZE=-1]DX6490 to a Sony Cybershot but I don't even consider myself an amateur[/SIZE][/FONT][/FONT], I'm so new at this. Amateur implies that you know at least a little bit about what you are doing. I know that I'll be learning to take the perfect shot in the years to come. But what really grinds my gears are people who snicker behind my back when I make a mistake. I have had a few of them, I turn and just stare at them blankly (something I'm really, really, really good at-- comes with years of customer service work) until they either shut up and keep their comments to themselves or tell me what I'm doing wrong. 

I don't like snide remarks about equipment I'm using, either. 'Only a noob uses a Sony a200'. So? Why is that so bad? I can't justify spending thousands of dollars on camera equipment that I haven't got the foggiest notion how to use. 

Photographing people who feel compelled to make faces at the camera. My brothers and father are known for this. They even made faces at our photographer for my wedding. 

Dirty lenses. My dogs are usually the subject of most of my shots but if I'm not quick enough to get out of their way, I usually get a slimy lens.


----------



## Jus7 A Phas3

Carmel said:


> I don't like snide remarks about equipment I'm using, either. 'Only a noob uses a Sony a200'. So? Why is that so bad? I can't justify spending thousands of dollars on camera equipment that I haven't got the foggiest notion how to use.


 

What losers.


----------



## KD5NRH

peterbj7 said:


> I don't know about the S730, but my L85 also defaults to "flash on" (actually red eye) if I turn it on in Auto mode.  So I don't.  I turn it to "Program" and then it retains any setting I want it to have.



Hmm...that actually works.  Thanks.


----------



## Hannahbelle

domromer said:


> Gearheads. People who want  to do nothing but explore the entire contents of your camera bag, compare it against theirs, then tell you all the fancy gear they plan on getting. Then look at you like your the jerk when they tell you all about how they can't wait to get a medium format digital back on their Rebel.



*sigh*
You've just described my sister.  And she can't take pictures...
So she'll compare her bajillion $ camera to my fuji prosumer, and make me feel like crap that I'm a broke student who can't afford anything better....
but then I'll look at her pictures, and giggle to myself.

Back when I was in photog. school for a year, we called those people gearhead geeks.


----------

