# Am I wrong for feeling like this?



## vipgraphx (Jan 24, 2014)

So today was picture day for our soccer team,( I am a Varsity High School Soccer Coach). This older gentlemen shows up with a couple of bags (his camera gear)

He starts to set up up and so I go walk over to see what he has and doing.  I noticed he was using a Nikon D3000 with kit lens for this shoot, with some Strobes. 

I thought to myself is he serious? Now I am thinking he is either really good and needs no professional camera OR he is a straight amateur. I hate to sound like a creep but honestly thats what was going through my mind. He even had order envelopes and what not.

Am I wrong, what would you think if this happened to you. Now I am not sure if the school paid him to come (which I am sure they did because the team photo will be for the year book) Or if he was just making money on the players personal orders from their singles. 

I was watching what he was doing to see if maybe he was a pro. Maybe his pro camera is in the shop or something you never know. But then looking at his camera placement I thought was poorly thought out. It was on the side of the goal, facing the field with bleachers in the back ground. The poses he was making the players do was sooo crazy..I thought no way could this guy be a seasoned pro.

Perhaps once I saw his camera I immediately started to doubt him..Once again Am I wrong? Am I just stereo typing? This kinda goes back to when people see big DSLR FF Chunky Cameras they think PRO&#8230;I know today I fell into that category!

Here was his set up.


----------



## fokker (Jan 24, 2014)

Hard to say without seeing the photos, but it sounds like you're being a bit judgemental. A D3000 and kit lens is perfect kit for these kinds of photos, really. It's not like you need a 24-70 2.8 and a D800 to get a sharp photo of a sports team, and hey at least he's using some lighting so you never know. 

Reminds me of a video I saw a while ago where a guy is shooting a model in his studio using just his iphone, and because he had a good lighting setup the pictures were great.


----------



## apaflo (Jan 24, 2014)

vipgraphx said:


> "To Many People Look For Problems That Are Not There, Just Because They Want To Find Fault In Something"



You do have a great signature line.


----------



## Aakajx (Jan 24, 2014)

Lol I was just going to quote that. 

Yeah I don't think you can judge it until you see the pictures? Maybe they turned out great. I hope for the schools sake they did turn out nice so it wasn't a waste of time and money.


----------



## Aakajx (Jan 24, 2014)

Do you think he was creeped out you watching him And taking pics of him? Lol


----------



## TheFantasticG (Jan 24, 2014)

fokker said:


> Hard to say without seeing the photos, but it sounds like you're being a bit judgmental.



This.

But, we all do it. It's human nature.


----------



## beachrat (Jan 24, 2014)

I'd be more judgmental about his lighting equipment and placement.


----------



## acparsons (Jan 24, 2014)

I stopped judging people's equipment when I got a photo that I took with a 1MP Point and Shoot published.


----------



## runnah (Jan 24, 2014)

In a well lit setting, any DSLR made in the last 10 years will produce an outstanding photo.


----------



## SCraig (Jan 24, 2014)

I don't think so to be honest.  I expect someone who claims to be a professional anything to have professional grade equipment to do the job with.  If I hired a professional photographer and he showed up with a $300 entry-level camera I would start having second thoughts as well.

And I admit it isn't a fair judgement.  We all know it's as much the photographer as it is the camera, however there are levels of expectation that professionals should live up to.  And, as has been said, there are numerous reasons why he might have been using that camera.  Maybe he's just a hobbyist doing a good deed.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jan 24, 2014)

Why didn't you just ask him who he was shooting for?

As a professional I always look around at the events I go to, even if I'm not working, just curious to see what people are doing, how they are shooting, what gear they have, how they hold the camera and what pictures they are missing.  Small side story, I saw a buddy of mine shooting and sent my 8 year old son to go down and tell him his shot would make a better vertical, the look on his face was priceless, I then walked over and he understood.

The point is, why worry about it, did it affect anything you were doing, if it bothered you, you should have asked some questions, not confront him, just be curious.  I was hire to do 45 head shots a few years ago and when I showed up there was another photographer there, I asked him who he was shooting for and it was the same people that had hired me, I was curious so I asked the woman that hired me and she said he was hired to do a group photo.  I talked to the photographer who was in a panic after seeing me, he started asking me all kinds of questions, we had been hired by separate people.  When his question came up about how much I was getting paid I asked him how much he was charging for the group shot of about 45 people, his fee was $600 less than I was charging to do simple point and shoot head shots that took me 20 minutes to run through, he also had the balls to tell me that my set up wouldn't work as the white wall I was using would cause too much glare, he was wrong and I showed him why.  He then asked me how I would set up the group, I gave him a simple suggestion, and he then explained to the woman that had hired him, he needed  to run out and rent a backdrop and wider lens.  It could have been setup and done in less than 15 minutes, but he didn't have the gear or the skills to handle this simple shoot.  I guess the $150 he was charging was a reflection on what he felt he was worth.

It's all simple, just ask questions.


----------



## runnah (Jan 24, 2014)

imagemaker46 said:


> Small side story, I saw a buddy of mine shooting and sent my 8 year old son to go down and tell him his shot would make a better vertical, the look on his face was priceless, I then walked over and he understood.



Haha.


----------



## Tiller (Jan 24, 2014)

One part of me wants to say you were wrong for judging, but the other part of me remembers when I saw a guy using a canon t3 and 18-55 at a wedding and judged the hell out of him. I think I may have had a little cause. A wedding has higher stakes than a HS soccer shoot.

We all do it in the moment, but feel bad afterwards.


----------



## jenko (Jan 24, 2014)

Maybe the guy is just working with what he has. I kinda doubt a high school is paying him big money. Now that our lovely governor cut education funding, I doubt our schools would have the funds to pay anyone.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jan 24, 2014)

I can't say that I have been judged by the gear I use, but I did get some pretty strange looks using a Canon t2i with a 400 2.8 last year. I'm sure a few of the professional photographers that didn't know me, were wondering, none bothered to ask, which is fine, keep them guessing.

A lot of photographers judge other photographers based on what gear they are using, I look at some and know that they are using company gear so they haven't had to lay out any money for the best that money can buy, and I see the freelancers with gear taped together doing a better job. On face value, who am I to judge what each is capable of with what they are using. If I watch long enough, see how the shoot, and what they shoot or don't shoot, I am now in a position to evaluate their skill level with the gear they are using. I base this on my own experience and skill level.  Some have no clue what they are doing and ask me for advice, usually the ones with the gear taped together, the ones with the high end gear already have the attitude of being superior simply because of the gear, this only proves to me they aren't worth my attention or help if they ask.  These are the high end photo pretenders.


----------



## The_Traveler (Jan 24, 2014)

I think it's OK to wonder but I would never post a picture with his face unblurred.


----------



## gsgary (Jan 24, 2014)

He was probably looking at the trainers and sports gear you were wearing thinking he's a crap coach i bet they never win a match


----------



## rexbobcat (Jan 24, 2014)

My first thought would be "Hmmm...This guy doesn't look like he knows what he's doing" *ego stroking powers activate* and then I would realize...wait a minute...HE got hired to take these photos - I didn't, and beyond that, I don't know what the photos look like. I've seen several photographers set up lights and scrims and blah blah and weird places, and I scoff because _that's obviously NOT going to work,_and then I look at the images and...Damn...They're good. Granted, it's not like that every time. Sometimes people who use crappy gear and take jobs also take crappy photos, but I don't think playing the part of the indignant know-it-all helps anyone. 

You can't judge a photographer by their gear.


----------



## Designer (Jan 24, 2014)

vipgraphx said:


> I was watching what he was doing to see if maybe he was a pro. Maybe his pro camera is in the shop or something you never know. But then looking at his camera placement I thought was poorly thought out. It was on the side of the goal, facing the field with bleachers in the back ground. The poses he was making the players do was sooo crazy..I thought no way could this guy be a seasoned pro.



In looking at the shadows on the ground, I'd say he might have used the sunlight to better advantage.  Maybe the bleachers were blurred out.  I am quick to criticize poor poses if the directions are coming from the photographer.  Yes, he may be a pro, but his experience level is not "seasoned".  Nevertheless, it was his shoot, not yours, so staying out of it was the thing to do.

I have seen pros make really dumb mistakes, but someone is paying them, so I stay out of it.

You're not wrong in thinking he is over his head, but still don't argue with him.


----------



## KmH (Jan 24, 2014)

The_Traveler said:


> I think it's OK to wonder but I would never post a picture with his face unblurred.


 :scratch: Huh? Why?


----------



## vipgraphx (Jan 24, 2014)

Interesting responses! Its funny how there is this thing on this forum about people who get their first DSLR and get a Facebook and want to shoot weddings. Lots of negative comments about that but, when it comes to this lots scenario seems like the majority is that do not judge a book by its cover.

I will admit I am guilty as hell and I have no shame in that, I have a level of expectations when it comes to a professional photographer that they have professional gear or any professional for that matter. Its like showing up to a NASCAR race with a stock honda civic&#8230;Do we still say&#8230;..hey its not the gear its the driver? 

When I started coming around photography forums and read peoples comments about what camera to get and lens, one of the first things out or many folks mouths was ditch the kit lens they suck and get better glass. Its interesting that one comment is that its more than capable of producing great results and even now and iPhone with right lighting&#8230;..WOW!

If this is the case Nikon and Canon should stop making these "Pro Camera Body's and Lenses" and start pushing entry level gear and lenses..because with the right lighting who needs all this expensive gear when they can do just as well with equipment under $1000. Besides its the eye behind the camera anyway.

Yes at firs I looked at his setup and said in honesty this is crazy&#8230;then I gave it some time and realized light placement seemed weird, one of his lights was missing a bulb&#8230;his placement for the boys was horrible and their individuals posses where so whack that I had to really question what the heck was really going on. Unfortunately  he had to shoot JV as well and we still had practice so I did not want to make a big deal about it and thought to myself perhaps the end results will be so good that will make me rethink everything I just thought.

In 14 years of coaching youth sports I have seen many un happy parents when they get their pictures back and nothing they can do. It happens all the time every year every where. Maybe thats why I have developed this thought process and automatically started to judge this book by its cover&#8230;I never said I was perfect or could do better&#8230;.

there seems to be a few lessons here..

1) An entry level camera, kit lens and light set up can do the job of a $3000-$6000 + set up. ( Not I will never believe that a $200 can yield same results as a $2000 lens regardless of light)

2) Ask questions about the person and drill them when they are on site working. (Not, I am not going to bother someone while they are doing their job)

3) Never through a stone at someone unless you are totally innocent and free from sin.


----------



## JacaRanda (Jan 24, 2014)

This photography thing can be very confusing for someone not capable of filtering facts and opinions and egos and biasis etc.


----------



## photofree (Jan 24, 2014)

Its not the camera, its the operator, and the result.

profound thinking about stuff


----------



## Derrel (Jan 24, 2014)

KmH said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> > I think it's OK to wonder but I would never post a picture with his face unblurred.
> ...



My thoughts exactly....I mean, we have members here that regularly post "street" pictures here of little kids and grown-up people just going about their business...how is this guy any different???

As to this guy's lighting set-up...looks like he's got one light off axis as a main light, and a second light close to camera position as a fill light. Pretty standard...

The Nikon D3xxx or whatever he had has a much better sensor than a "pro" camera from five to ten years ago. Youth sports team portraits these days are pretty much a low-rent business...I'm surprised somebody who even has two monolights was hired to shoot this gig...it could just as easily have been a MWAC or GWAC with a single, on-camera, right-in-the-hotshoe speedlight and a $69 Dolinca tripod, you know?


----------



## ORourkeK (Jan 24, 2014)

Derrel said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > The_Traveler said:
> ...



It's different because these kids and grown ups in the pictures aren't being criticized. This post is criticizing the man in the picture. That is why it is different.


----------



## vipgraphx (Jan 24, 2014)

After reading some post I thought it would be good to remove the guys head and use a disguise.


----------



## e.rose (Jan 24, 2014)

What *I* wanna know is why you care so much?

If he was shooting with a school team, chances are he was a Lifetouch (or a similar company) photographer.

Even if he was a locally based, I bet he's selling those prints, magnets, pins, and calendars at price that would probably even make Walmart cringe... because parents don't spend TONS of money on team photos of their kids, and probably aren't gonna be bothered by what they get as long as they can see their kid's face.

I agree you can't judge the photographer without seeing the image.

No, a $200 lens isn't going to be a high quality as a $2000 lens, but he's not shooting for Vogue here. He's shooting for mostly 4x6 prints... MAYBE an 8x10... and some novelty sports cards... (That package probably costs $15 for all of that), and like I said, the parents aren't going to care or know the difference.

It irritates me when people judge other people by their gear or how they're shooting.

People used to judge my T2i when I was shooting with that, and then they'd compare their shots against mine and wonder how I was getting such quality out of a Rebel camera, because they couldn't get their 5DMKII to do that.

I had someone at an outdoor restaurant/bar come up to me once and say, "Excuse me... I just have to ask you something. I notice you're taking photos of your friends here with a flash, but you have it pointed up... and there's nothing to bounce off of. Why are you doing that?" He asked it in such an arrogant way, like he was proud of himself for pointing out my idiocy, until I showed him that with the diffuser cup I was using, pointing the flash up, would still shoot light forward... but not as harshly as pointing the flash at them with the diffuser cup. So I got just the right amount of fill I wanted, with an on-camera flash, without making it looks SUPER on-camera-flashy (Yes, that is a technical term.  ).

He didn't believe me, so I showed him a shot with the flash pointed at them, and the flash pointed up and all he said was, "Oh... Interesting..." and that was it.

You have no idea what that guy is doing or getting paid or what those shots are gonna look like until you see them, so you really can't say much about it.

Unless he had the lens cap still on the whole time... THEN it's a safe bet, those shots aren't coming out... :lmao:


----------



## JacaRanda (Jan 24, 2014)

photofree said:


> Its not the camera, its the operator, and the result.
> 
> profound thinking about stuff



But, but, but......


----------



## runnah (Jan 24, 2014)

It doesn't bother me, although I do silently judge them if they have lower quality gear than I and openly spite them if they have better gear.


----------



## pixmedic (Jan 24, 2014)

eh, your feelings arent wrong...they are your feelings. 
we make judgements every day, whether we mean to or not. its just human nature. 
it is not our feelings that define us, but how we act on them.


----------



## pgriz (Jan 24, 2014)

We had something similar going on in our photo club.  We had a well-off gentleman with a Leica M9 submit a number of images to the club competitions and when the scores were displayed for each image, he was loudly wondering why the "good" stuff was scoring so low (actually it was in the middle of the pack).  The consistent winner over several competitions was a lady using a mirrorless camera that probably cost less than his camera case.  The difference was...  she knew what she was doing.  His stuff wasn't bad, but it didn't have the visual zing that hers (and the other winners) had.  I haven't seen him around much lately - rumour was that he joined another club where he thought his skills would be respected.  For me, it's less about the gear, and more about the skill.


----------



## Bossy (Jan 24, 2014)

D3k isnt a terrible camera, its not like he showed up to shoot an NFL lineup right? A portrait shoot in the daytime, Im surprised he even had a light kit. As a parent I don't expect much from school/sports photographers.


----------



## vipgraphx (Jan 24, 2014)

e.rose said:


> What *I* wanna know is why you care so much?
> 
> If he was shooting with a school team, chances are he was a Lifetouch (or a similar company) photographer.
> 
> Even if he was a locally based, I bet he's selling those prints, magnets, pins, and calendars at price that would probably even make Walmart cringe... because parents don't spend TONS of money on team photos of their kids, and probably aren't gonna be bothered by what they get as long as they can see their kid's face.



What is the relevance here?



e.rose said:


> I agree you can't judge the photographer without seeing the image.



I agree and thats why I gave him the benefit of the doubt until we see the pictures&#8230;BUT many people do!



e.rose said:


> No, a $200 lens isn't going to be a high quality as a $2000 lens, but he's not shooting for Vogue here. He's shooting for mostly 4x6 prints... MAYBE an 8x10... and some novelty sports cards... (That package probably costs $15 for all of that), and like I said, the parents aren't going to care or know the difference.



So you are saying that kids pictures are not as important as Vogue? That parents don't deserve the highest quality work one can provide? Whether its Vogue or kids sports cards&#8230;why not offer the best? Its not like this profession cost $30K + to get quality gear. Its a profession that has actually low costs compared to other business so why not get a $2000 lens and give people more? 

I have equipment for my printing business that cost WAY more than a whole pro photography set up does..I only use the best materials and machines because I want to produce the best quality work I can for my clients. I want there to be no hesitation why they should come back to me for their printing needs. Yes I can get away with doing the same job with less quality materials and the clients may not know BUT, I will and I have more integrity than that.




e.rose said:


> It irritates me when people judge other people by their gear or how they're shooting.



Why, people get judged all the time..Look at American Idol&#8230;They get judged on their style, voice, eye contact etc&#8230;IF you do not want to be judged stay home. Its apart of life.

People used to judge my T2i when I was shooting with that, and then they'd compare their shots against mine and wonder how I was getting such quality out of a Rebel camera, because they couldn't get their 5DMKII to do that.




e.rose said:


> I had someone at an outdoor restaurant/bar come up to me once and say, "Excuse me... I just have to ask you something. I notice you're taking photos of your friends here with a flash, but you have it pointed up... and there's nothing to bounce off of. Why are you doing that?" He asked it in such an arrogant way, like he was proud of himself for pointing out my idiocy, until I showed him that with the diffuser cup I was using, pointing the flash up, would still shoot light forward... but not as harshly as pointing the flash at them with the diffuser cup. So I got just the right amount of fill I wanted, with an on-camera flash, without making it looks SUPER on-camera-flashy (Yes, that is a technical term.  ).
> 
> He didn't believe me, so I showed him a shot with the flash pointed at them, and the flash pointed up and all he said was, "Oh... Interesting..." and that was it.
> 
> ...



Great story now I see why you take this more personal.


----------



## vipgraphx (Jan 24, 2014)

Man, Some folks have really taken this personal. I guess those who have been judged before







Its not like I went up to him and asked him anything. I did not bother him nor did I question any of his instructions while he was positioning us for the team photo. I let him do what he needed to do. I did not talk to the school about it, I did not talk to any other players or coaches. It was just a thought in my head. 


As far as me caring so much, I don't, I was just curious and wondered If there was anyone else out there that would have thought the same thing I did.


I am sure that all those who have posted in this thread have judged or stereo typed at one point in their life if not more than once but, like *pixmedic* has stated its how we act on them.


I figured this was a photography community and a great place to ask a question like this. I did not realize some would get so offended or take it personal. WOW.


Based off what e.Rose said about the cost and what not..I have a thought on that. Whether or not this person is making 100's if $$$ or doing this for free. First impressions are always the most important and when you are out on a job you never know who is watching and there is always the potential for future jobs, Why not 




I guess the real problem is this. I assumed this guy was a professional photographer (first mistake) My expectations of any professional is that they use professional equipment to get the most out of it..Thats my opinion and I am entitled to it.






Next Question should be  then,&#8230;. How many of you Professional Photographers do not use professional gear?


----------



## e.rose (Jan 24, 2014)

vipgraphx said:


> I see why you take this more personal.





Quite the contrary.

I could give two sh*ts about any of this. It's the internet.

I was just answering your initial question. You're the one that seems to be put off by someone that isn't affecting you in any way.

But... With that... I gotta be somewhere in an hour, so Im'a hit the road.

Enjoy your discussion.


----------



## pixmedic (Jan 24, 2014)

vipgraphx said:


> Man, Some folks have really taken this personal. I guess those who have been judged before
> 
> 
> 
> ...



depends on what you consider "professional" gear. 
some people feel that nothing  short of the highest end  "flagship" model is "professional", and only OEM equipment. 
other people feel that any tool in the right hands that can get the job done right is professional.


----------



## Bossy (Jan 24, 2014)

I shoot only with my ipad.
What thats not professional?


----------



## Derrel (Jan 24, 2014)

I would not worry too much about it, Vipgraphxs. It's just a bunch of people giving opinions on a photo and some text about some dude who got hired to shoot some team photos. These days there are a zillion "professional photographers", of varying skill, and with varying degrees of equipment. MANY times, it seems to me that advanced, wealthy amateurs often have better,newer gear than actual, working professionals, who are often using older equipment. Many times, if images are printed small, or posted on the web, or printed in magazines or on newsprint, the halftone screen "equalizes" the MP count...on newsprint, the old 2.7MP Nikon D1h looked great! In a modern magazine, even a double page spread does NOT need many MP's...SPorts Illustrated was printing double page spreads shot with 2.7 and 4 MP Nikons and Canons over a decade ago, and the pics looked great!

Yeah...there are people who feel insecure/offended by other people asking them about their own personal shooting methods. That just goes with the territory these days...

I wouldn't worry too much about it. If this fellow's pictures turned out poorly, it's not a surprise...the world today is filled with people who have taught themselves how to "be photographers" by watching videos and stuff...some of those people go out and charge money for shoots...they "get hired", often hired by people who know Jack Squat about what a good photo ought to look like. A few years ago, I met a guy on-line who had been hired by a professional hockey team to shoot for them...he was a wealthy retired surgeon, and he had LOTS of top-of-the-line Nikon gear...I asked to see some of his work, and he referred me to some web galleries....he could not shoot for SH*+, if you ask me, but he "had the gear", and he was a middle-aged male, and an *expert* bulShi++er, so he got hired...


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jan 24, 2014)

You're the coach? Then I'd absolutely ask - I'd expect a coach would be notified by the school if someone was going to show up for whatever purpose (on school grounds, in this day and age, yeah I'd be asking). Talking to him you might have been able to find out more about him and could have figured out if he's a pro or one of the craigslist/fb crowd. Now I suppose you'll know when the kids get their pictures...

In my area schools have to take bids for just about anything and have to take a lower certainly not a higher bid; and I don't know if whoever is making the decision knows anything about photography to know what to look for. Maybe it would be worth looking into either possibly doing the photos yourself for the team? or at least offer suggestions on where (or where not) they could find a decent photographer. Especially if parents aren't happy with the photos, then they might need to let someone at the school know so other options for the future could be looking into.

edit - You know, you might be able to tell more by _what_ he's doing than what equipment he has; when I'd be taking pictures at my nephew's Little League games etc I'd get asked if I was taking pictures for the local paper etc. I've had that happen often enough that I figure I must look like I'm doing _some_thing...


----------



## vipgraphx (Jan 24, 2014)

Yes Im one of the coaches not the Head Coach. I am assistant Coach and head Keeper Coach for Varsity and JV. 

We were notified that we were going to have pictures yesterday it was no surprise. I did not think it was in my place to go and ask or drill him while he was busy working. We had other things going on as well.

Yeah schools usually have preferred vendors and also will take lowest bid. Like I said before , I'm not sure if he was being paid plus whom ever ordered pictures or if it was free and he was only making money on prints, I have no Idea. I don't even know if he was just getting started or have been doing this for years. He could be a very excellent photographer just happened to choose this camera for this purpose I really have not clue.

All I am saying is that I DID judge him once I saw his gear..Was I wrong for judging? Yeah probably so. 

But nobody got hurt because I had thoughts in my mind.


----------



## bribrius (Jan 24, 2014)

quite frankly, it is none of your business what he shoots with. OR even the business of the person paying him what he shoots with. What is being paid for is the actual pics or prints. If there is a problem with them, the purchaser has a genuine complaint requiring a resolution of such discrepancy, error, or potential failure of providing a quality service. 
But what is used to provide that service, is up to, at the sole discretion unless otherwise agreed upon, the actual service provider. If he showed up with a camera phone (as bad as that sounds) it still wouldn't be any of your business.


----------



## Robin Usagani (Jan 24, 2014)

I judge people  (fong dong.. ahem!).

Maybe he was doing FP/HSS mode shooting?


----------



## JacaRanda (Jan 24, 2014)

bribrius said:


> quite frankly, it is none of your business what he shoots with. OR even the business of the person paying him what he shoots with. What is being paid for is the actual pics or prints. If there is a problem with them, the purchaser has a genuine complaint requiring a resolution of such discrepancy, error, or potential failure of providing a quality service.
> But what is used to provide that service, is up to, at the sole discretion unless otherwise agreed upon, the actual service provider. If he showed up with a camera phone (as bad as that sounds) it still wouldn't be any of your business.



This sounds about right.....until the next person posts a rebuttal that will sound about right too.

Something like our government.  Everybody is right and everybody is wrong.  Or half of everybody is right and have of everybody is wrong.  Either way, the majority of us are unhappy about what is right and what is wrong.

Wenis contest all over again.


----------



## vipgraphx (Jan 24, 2014)

bribrius said:


> quite frankly, it is none of your business what he shoots with. OR even the business of the person paying him what he shoots with. What is being paid for is the actual pics or prints. If there is a problem with them, the purchaser has a genuine complaint requiring a resolution of such discrepancy, error, or potential failure of providing a quality service.
> But what is used to provide that service, is up to, at the sole discretion unless otherwise agreed upon, the actual service provider. If he showed up with a camera phone (as bad as that sounds) it still wouldn't be any of your business.




I never said it was any of my business only a judgmental thought. If I made it my business then I would have went and disturbed him while he was working.

And as far as any contracts are concerned if one pays for a professional to photograph one has the RIGHT to assume one would be using professional equipment to do the job. It goes with the territory. Most average people I am sure do not think any different.

No matter what anyone TRY's to say about a D3000 and kit lens out performing or at the very least "GETTING THE JOB DONE" as good as a FF D700,D800,D610,D3 and so one with a 24-70 or 70-200 is whack! And you would be arguing just for the sake of arguing.

Regardless if this is JUST a high school team photo and individual photos. What if the School decided to make huge print of this at a later time, could they do so with the same resolution? I think not. Are the faces going to be as sharp if the need to blow it up? I think not. For good ness sake its a D3000 with a 18-55 kit lens the older lens mind you. 

If any of you seriously believe your bs then tops to you and I would like to do your next family function for a small fee of $600. I will shoot with my iPhone and Flashlights. I can use some 2x4's for stands and the flashlights will be duck taped to them. I will use a table as a tripod and get you quality photos. Oh and don't judge my se up!


Oh yeah if this is the case who needs to spend so much money on the next big thing and quality glass when they can save a lot of money on a $300 camera.

All these new threads about what camera should they get everyone should refer them to this thread and push the D3000/kit. Since there really is not difference. As long as the photographer is a pro he will get the best photos ever. No more heavy bulky cameras and heavy pricey lenses.


----------



## rexbobcat (Jan 24, 2014)

This whole thread reminds me of someone who says "I'm totally not racist, like, at all, seriously, but what's up with black people, am I right?"

It's a call for validation under the guise of a seemingly innocent/naive question. Maybe I'm wrong, but I will wager that you wanted most of us to agree with you. "Yeah, you're totally right. That guy is such a noob." 

But then when that doesn't happen you get defensive and say that we're the ones with the problem. We're the ones taking it personally. 

THIS is the reason why these threads never work out. I've been here and done this exact thing. The basis of this thread at its core is controversial. Surely you sensed that when you made it.


----------



## pixmedic (Jan 24, 2014)

given the general responses here to people posting about paid gigs when they list "inferior" equipment, i am honestly surprised at the backlash for thinking a D3000 should not be used for pro work. if this had been a wedding instead of a so called "non important" event, that guy would have been drawn and quartered by the TPF mob.

not saying the guy wont produce good pictures, but theres no way the TPF crowd would have been as forgiving to a wedding photographer sporting that same gear.


----------



## vipgraphx (Jan 24, 2014)

pixmedic said:


> given the general responses here to people posting about paid gigs when they list "inferior" equipment, i am honestly surprised at the backlash for thinking a D3000 should not be used for pro work. if this had been a wedding instead of a so called "non important" event, that guy would have been drawn and quartered by the TPF mob.
> 
> not saying the guy wont produce good pictures, but theres no way the TPF crowd would have been as forgiving to a wedding photographer sporting that same gear.




Exactly!

Seems like since its a high school shoot any camera would be ok and get the job done. But the real question would be would this guy shoot a wedding with the same gear? Would we get the same thoughts...

Its almost like a crazy dream. I have read threads upon threads about people using subpar equipment and  getting bashed and nasty rude comments about folks 100 fold on here. Now all of a sudden everyone is innocent with no prejudice. LMAO.


----------



## JacaRanda (Jan 24, 2014)

vipgraphx said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > given the general responses here to people posting about paid gigs when they list "inferior" equipment, i am honestly surprised at the backlash for thinking a D3000 should not be used for pro work. if this had been a wedding instead of a so called "non important" event, that guy would have been drawn and quartered by the TPF mob.
> ...



Blame the mods.  They only got rid of a few of those bashers, not all


----------



## bribrius (Jan 24, 2014)

vipgraphx said:


> bribrius said:
> 
> 
> > quite frankly, it is none of your business what he shoots with. OR even the business of the person paying him what he shoots with. What is being paid for is the actual pics or prints. If there is a problem with them, the purchaser has a genuine complaint requiring a resolution of such discrepancy, error, or potential failure of providing a quality service.
> ...



you kind of just hit the point. What a job pays, is directly equivalent in most instances at least, with what is utilized by a service provider in providing the service. That is the nature of all business. If one wants to require certain equipment used, and a certain level of quality, it really needs to be put into the contract or negotiated beforehand. If one is consistently going with lowest bidders, well lowest bidders often cant afford the higher end equipment costs. This doesn't always mean the final product will suffer though.  if the school wants to be guaranteed a quality level they can later blow up, this needs to be made known in advance. And they should consider this before taking the lowest bidder. And the payment for the service negotiated with consideration of equipment and expectations. All business is this way. I understand your feelings on it, but it really doesn't work out like your thinking. It has nothing to do with what equipment is better, or worse. least from my perspective but I just see it as a business agreement.  It has nothing to do with the camera, or ducktape, but rather about negotiation, price, and what rights a customer has and what rights a service provider has.  
If you hire someone to mow your lawn, for instance, do you have a right to decide the brand of lawnmower they use?
Not unless specified.  Do you have a right to find fault with the lawn afterwards if not meeting a certain expected standard? Absolutely. They arent buying his camera, they are buying the outcome. It is the outcome that is the negotiated instrument. This is why most contracts that are bid have bidding requirements for the bidders before they can bid and specifications on service expected and equipment utilized at times (like in construction).,


----------



## vipgraphx (Jan 24, 2014)

rexbobcat said:


> This whole thread reminds me of someone who says "I'm totally not racist, like, at all, seriously, but what's up with black people, am I right?"
> 
> It's a call for validation under the guise of a seemingly innocent/naive question. Maybe I'm wrong, but I will wager that you wanted most of us to agree with you. "Yeah, you're totally right. That guy is such a noob."
> 
> ...




BUT your wrongI did say I was probably wrong.

My issue is that the responses were not so much about what others thought,  but turned out to a certain X camera and Lens being able to do the job of a more Pro came and lens and who cares what someone uses. The non importance  for high school team shoot. The how horrible for you  me to judge. 

Lets face it we all have judged at some point. So what I am honest about it and even admitted I was wrong to judge without knowing.

I don't need the whole forum to agree with me a matter of fact they all disagree..but a simple answer of 

yeah I would not have looked at it like that.

or yea I would have though the same thing would have worked fine.

but quoting my signature and turning it into something it was not intended is the problem.


----------



## rexbobcat (Jan 24, 2014)

pixmedic said:


> given the general responses here to people posting about paid gigs when they list "inferior" equipment, i am honestly surprised at the backlash for thinking a D3000 should not be used for pro work. if this had been a wedding instead of a so called "non important" event, that guy would have been drawn and quartered by the TPF mob.
> 
> not saying the guy wont produce good pictures, but theres no way the TPF crowd would have been as forgiving to a wedding photographer sporting that same gear.



I think that's the thing though. This type of photography is only slightly comparable to wedding photography (in my opinion) or some of the more technically challenging types of photography, which is why people on the forum are not being agreeable.


----------



## rexbobcat (Jan 24, 2014)

vipgraphx said:


> rexbobcat said:
> 
> 
> > This whole thread reminds me of someone who says "I'm totally not racist, like, at all, seriously, but what's up with black people, am I right?"
> ...



But if you already thought you were probably wrong then why did the question need to be asked in the first place? It doesn't make a difference one way or another because your mind was probably made up about the question regardless of what people on the forum said. 

That's why it seems, to me, like you were being slightly self-deprecating in order to to avoid us saying "Wow what a jerk" while still getting the validation of your opinion.

I read into things too much a lot though so...It's w/e. lol


----------



## tirediron (Jan 24, 2014)

Professional gear:  Any gear used by a professional.  It's really that simple!  

Don't forget that the D3XXX bodies are many orders of magnitude superior in their performance compared to what the most expensive gear could produce not all that many years ago.  Results make a photographer.  Gear does NOT!


----------



## pixmedic (Jan 24, 2014)

rexbobcat said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > given the general responses here to people posting about paid gigs when they list "inferior" equipment, i am honestly surprised at the backlash for thinking a D3000 should not be used for pro work. if this had been a wedding instead of a so called "non important" event, that guy would have been drawn and quartered by the TPF mob.
> ...



quite possibly true. 
however, let me elaborate a little more. 
wedding photographer-> needs pro gear right? most people here would say yes, i would think. 
high school sports-> maybe not so much?, BUT...IF (and I say if because I dont know for sure) IF that guy is a paid sports photographer for hire....
what now? sports photographer usually incurs the opinion that you should have pro gear right? it might not just be HS sports she shoots. 
suppose his gig the next day is a pro hockey game. is the opinion on his gear still the same? how about for a pro soccer match? A NFL game?

some weddings are easy and well lit enough to shoot with a D3000 and kit lens. others....not so much. but who would tell someone who aspires to be a wedding photographer that a D3000 and kit lens, even with strobes, is suitable for professional wedding work?
I can absolutely understand why another photographer would look at this guy, recognize his equipment, and think....wow, this guy is taking paid sports jobs with that gear?

maybe hes good enough to get great results with it. i have no idea. but i have a hard time believing that anyone else here would not have thought the same thing. I would have myself. 

I really think though, that the spirit of this post was not to ignite some debate over what gear is sufficient, nor to "out" this guy as being under equipped for this job.... but rather to point out the subliminal and almost reflexive judgements we make almost every day, even if they are unsubstantiated as judging that guy was before seeing his work (which was already pointed out by vip in his initial post)


----------



## Derrel (Jan 24, 2014)

I keep thinking, what with all this new technology we have at our disposal, that we could get a group of people together, you know like a flash mob, and we could go over to this so-called professional photographer's place, and work on that "drawing and quartering" that Pixmedic mentioned...but you know, in a more "modern way" than they did back in the ancient Roman times...you know, like for the drawing part, we could draw a mustache and a goatee on the guy,using colored Sharpie markers, like they do at frat parties on people who pass out...and for the quartering part we could like, pelt him with rolls of 25 cent pieces...

Just a thought...might make him think twice about using a lowly Nikon D3000 for paid gigs...

Hmmm...I've got a pack of Sharpie markers here...


----------



## SCraig (Jan 24, 2014)

Well, let me ask a hypothetical question of some of those here:

If you were scheduled to have surgery and found out that the surgeon used XActo knives as opposed to surgical scalpels and bought his scissors and forceps from the bargain bin at Hobby Lobby would you still be willing to go through with the surgery?  After all, a cut is a cut is a cut and the man behind the knife, not the equipment, are what matter.

What if you took your car to a shop and the only tool the mechanic had was a pair of Vice Grips and some duct tape?  What does it matter as long as the car gets fixed?

There IS a difference between an entry-level camera and a pro-level camera.  There IS A difference between pro-level lenses and entry-level lenses.  Everyone here knows that.  When I hire a professional I expect professional equipment, methods, and materials.  It's not optional, it's expected and it's part of what I paid for.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 24, 2014)

SCraig said:


> Well, let me ask a hypothetical question of some of those here:
> 
> If you were scheduled to have surgery and found out that the surgeon used XActo knives as opposed to surgical scalpels and bought his scissors and forceps from the bargain bin at Hobby Lobby would you still be willing to go through with the surgery?  After all, a cut is a cut is a cut and the man behind the knife, not the equipment, are what matter.
> 
> ...



EXCEPT TODAY, the idea of a "professional photographer" is in something like 80% of all new photographic businesses, according to a New York Times article, a Mom With a Camera (a female, who has kids, and who works primarily among her own network of other mothers, and operates a single-proprietor photo business), often using a lower-end d-slr camera, and having very little experience in photography, and whose business is often supported by a working spouse or significant other with a steady "day job".

In other words, "these days" a *professional photographer *often has little experience, very little equipment, and very little formal training. I think a lot of people have ideas of who and what constitutes a professional photographer which are very,very,very much out of date and out of touch with current realities.

I personally know of several people who call themselves "photographers", but who are severely under-capitalized. The guy who showed up to snap the team pics for Vipgraphxs's squad is a GWAC--a Guy With a Camera...but again, THAT is what many people hire as a "professional photographer", off of Craigslist or wherever...


----------



## pixmedic (Jan 24, 2014)

SCraig said:


> Well, let me ask a hypothetical question of some of those here:
> 
> If you were scheduled to have surgery and found out that the surgeon used XActo knives as opposed to surgical scalpels and bought his scissors and forceps from the bargain bin at Hobby Lobby would you still be willing to go through with the surgery?  After all, a cut is a cut is a cut and the man behind the knife, not the equipment, are what matter.
> 
> ...




would you even know the difference in equipment?
your comparing equipment that was not meant for surgery and equipment that WAS meant for photography. apples and oranges. 
would you know whether your surgeon was using Medicon or swann-morton blades? 
maybe the doctor went with a cheaper Havel scalpel. 

unless you can see box the blade came in, you will have no idea what equipment he used, only what the end result is. 
unless you can see the exif data, you have no idea what camera was used, only what the end result was. if the end result is a good picture  you are happy with, why do you care what camera or lens the photographer used? if you look at someones portfolio, love their work, and decide to hire them...will you fire them if you find out they dont use gear that meets your standards of what they should be using?

will you stop me from saving you or a family members life because my lifepak 12 monitor is circa 1995 and in no way the newest flagship model? it sure paces and defibrillates well enough to get the job done, but it is old tech by today's standards.  If you ever need EMS for help, make sure they are using the latest "pro" gear before letting them work on anyone you know.


----------



## bribrius (Jan 24, 2014)

SCraig said:


> Well, let me ask a hypothetical question of some of those here:
> 
> If you were scheduled to have surgery and found out that the surgeon used XActo knives as opposed to surgical scalpels and bought his scissors and forceps from the bargain bin at Hobby Lobby would you still be willing to go through with the surgery? After all, a cut is a cut is a cut and the man behind the knife, not the equipment, are what matter.
> 
> ...


you are the reason autorepair shops around here charge a hundred dollars a hour now and my health insurance costs 15000 a year. 
Seen the bill on a surgery? They can afford the nicer exacto knives they arent getting just six hundred bucks....
The majority of photographers probably are poverty level or at least not incredibly well off. They work hard for their money. The hobbiest in these fields have more money than the people that actually do this for a living usually. Comparing someone that does school kids pictures to surgeons. a six hundred dollar or less payout to a twenty thousand dollar one. that's hilarious. And he probably isn't even making six hundred. Really. how much this guy making on this team shoot? Say he sells twenty a piece, at least ten kids. so a couple hundred bucks maybe. MINUS gas, 170 or 180, minus taxes, if he is self employed he pays through the nose, if he is paying in overhead with employees comp ss all that even more. so maybe a hundred after it is all said and done, maybe? And it isn't like he has these booked every hour here maybe does a few a week. I know a couple people that do this type of thing. They aren't exactly making a lot of money. To think, as some of you appear to, that he should bring ten k in equipment to a shoot with a hundred dollar profit margin I find hilarious. Right. so say he does four of these a week or so even six. you know these gigs come and go. (why many people get out of -photography hard to live on it).
nets maybe six hundred a week maybe eight. But eight is probably dreaming he may not even net four. How many months does this poor bastard have to work JUST to pay for this high end photography stuff that people think he should have? Keep in mind. this isn't a side gig for somepeople. They have to pay food, lights, ya know, rent whatever. self employment taxes are nutso. They cant just make a few hundred bucks and go look for a new lense with it...


----------



## The_Traveler (Jan 24, 2014)

SCraig said:


> What if you took your car to a shop and the only tool the mechanic had was a pair of Vice Grips and some duct tape?  What does it matter as long as the car gets fixed?
> 
> There IS a difference between an entry-level camera and a pro-level camera.  There IS A difference between pro-level lenses and entry-level lenses.  Everyone here knows that.  When I hire a professional I expect professional equipment, methods, and materials.  It's not optional, it's expected and it's part of what I paid for.



What  if your mechanic has adequate tools, but not expensive pro-level tools?
That's the situation here. 
Tools that are adequate for the job.


----------



## SCraig (Jan 24, 2014)

pixmedic said:


> would you even know the difference in equipment?
> your comparing equipment that was not meant for surgery and equipment that WAS meant for photography. apples and oranges.
> would you know whether your surgeon was using Medicon or swann-morton blades?
> maybe the doctor went with a cheaper Havel scalpel.


No, I'm comparing implements that were meant to cut to other implements that were meant to cut.  Apples and apples.  However, as a layman, I would not know the difference between a Medicon or Swann-Morton blade, much as many photography laymen would not know the difference between a D3000 and a D3.  You know the difference between a scalpel and XActo knife, and we BOTH know the difference between a D3000 and a D3.



> unless you can see box the blade came in, you will have no idea what equipment he used, only what the end result is.
> unless you can see the exif data, you have no idea what camera was used, only what the end result was. if the end result is a good picture  you are happy with, why do you care what camera or lens the photographer used? if you look at someones portfolio, love their work, and decide to hire them...will you fire them if you find out they dont use gear that meets your standards of what they should be using?


I would not hire them in the first place unless they were using professional equipment.  It is a question I would ask of a prospective photographer.


----------



## SCraig (Jan 24, 2014)

The_Traveler said:


> What  if your mechanic has adequate tools, but not expensive pro-level tools?
> That's the situation here.
> Tools that are adequate for the job.


The determination of whether the results are adequate has not been made yet.


----------



## rexbobcat (Jan 24, 2014)

pixmedic said:


> rexbobcat said:
> 
> 
> > pixmedic said:
> ...



I agree that sports photography requires specific cameras to get the most out of it in terms of image quality and ease of use, but I was under the assumption that this was just the guy taking the team photos.

I mean, just looking at the OP's photo, it was a sunny day with decent weather, so the way I see it, he could have taken the same photo with a 5DIII and process it the same, and it would be almost indiscernible from the photo taken with the entry-level DSLR. 

And I would like to think that this post wasn't supposed to be inflammatory, but...reflecting on the fact that photographers judge other photographers is like reflecting on the fact that everybody poops. It just felt like there was an ulterior motive.


----------



## The_Traveler (Jan 24, 2014)

Let's say you need your toilet replaced.

Plumber A will charge $200 and uses Craftsman tools.
Plumber B will charge $500 but uses only the finest Japanese hand crafted tools especially fit to his hand and then chrome-plated. They are kept in fitted walnut boxes in foam cutouts lined with cloth drenched in fine mineral oil. 

Each of them will leave behind essentially the same product.
 I don't think I could justify the extra $300.


----------



## rexbobcat (Jan 24, 2014)

SCraig said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> > What  if your mechanic has adequate tools, but not expensive pro-level tools?
> ...



That's not the assertion being made though.


----------



## pixmedic (Jan 24, 2014)

SCraig said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > would you even know the difference in equipment?
> ...



do you ask that of everyone?
your doctor?
your mechanic?
your plumber?
i mean...you wouldn't want someone working on your car with Husky tools when they clearly should be using Matco or SnapOn.


----------



## SCraig (Jan 24, 2014)

The_Traveler said:


> Let's say you need your toilet replaced.
> 
> Plumber A will charge $200 and uses Craftsman tools.
> Plumber B will charge $500 but uses only the finest Japanese hand crafted tools especially fit to his hand and then chrome-plated. They are kept in fitted walnut boxes in foam cutouts lined with cloth drenched in fine mineral oil.
> ...


I'd probably go with the cheap one.  I'll also settle for a photographer with a D4, he doesn't have to have a Phase-One.



pixmedic said:


> do you ask that of everyone?
> your doctor?
> your mechanic?
> your plumber?
> i mean...you wouldn't want someone working on your car with Husky tools when they clearly should be using Matco or SnapOn.


Pretty much, yes.


----------



## bribrius (Jan 24, 2014)

this thread has turned hilarious...:mrgreen:


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jan 24, 2014)

This thread has gone on way too long. It was a nice day, why was he setting up lights? perhaps he read it in the "How to shoot kids team pictures and look like a professional photographer" guide to looking like a professional photographer so other people assume that you are a professional photographer, while working as an accountant Monday to Friday.


----------



## tirediron (Jan 24, 2014)

I could see using strobes for that sort of shoot, but I can't see shooting bare tube, but I agree with the earlier poster that the position of the lights and the angle of the shadows don't really seem to make sense.


----------



## ulrichsd (Jan 24, 2014)

This is a funny thread.  My guess is the soccer team hired the cheapest  in the phone book.  And usually you get what you pay for.


----------



## Bossy (Jan 24, 2014)

Whenever I see a thread titled "Am I wrong..." I instantly want to jump in without reading and post a resounding Yes!!. Is that terrible?


----------



## e.rose (Jan 24, 2014)

Bossy said:


> Whenever I see a thread titled "Am I wrong..." I instantly want to jump in without reading and post a resounding Yes!!. Is that terrible?



No.


----------



## 407370 (Jan 24, 2014)

So I took some pictures of my car and showed them to a friend. He showed them to someone else and this person asked me to do similar shots of his car. Arrangements were made including price. You should have seen his face when I turned up with my FUJI HS20 bridge camera (the only camera I own), tripod and a bag of LED 's. A few hours were spent taking pictures and at the end the guy says to me that he expects his pictures to be the same quality as the ones he was shown and I assure him they will be but he did not seem convinced.

1 week later I get the images printed according to our arrangement and deliver them personally. He is as happy as can be with the end result and apart from thank you the only thing he said was " I suppose you will buy a better camera now".

I have had the FUJI HS20 for about 18 months and I know it inside out. I know it's limitations but I also know know how to fix issues when those limitations are exceeded. This was the only paid photographic work I have done in a year and I have no intention of getting a better camera. The guy knew I was not a professional photographer but also knew I could produce pictures he could not and we agreed on a monetary value for that. His expectation was based on what he saw as a professional level output requiring professional level tools and processing.

I have learned a lot in taking photographs for 30 years and one thing stands out. Nothing else matters but the end result.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 24, 2014)

pixmedic said:


> SCraig said:
> 
> 
> > pixmedic said:
> ...



Of course.  If my mechanic or plumber doesn't own at least a D5100, forget it.  My doctor had better have at least a decent full frame of some sort.  I have standards you know.  Lol


----------



## Robin Usagani (Jan 24, 2014)

tirediron said:


> I could see using strobes for that sort of shoot, but I can't see shooting bare tube, but I agree with the earlier poster that the position of the lights and the angle of the shadows don't really seem to make sense.



Bare bulb, perfect for FP/HSS.  You want all the power you can get.  Diffuser will kill your flash power. IMO, for sport photography people just want more reach/power as oppose to quality of light.  My buddy use four 600RT on his running shoes commercial shoot on HSS mode.  This guy uses it for surfing shots.


----------



## tirediron (Jan 24, 2014)

Yesssss...  good points, BUT...  I can't imagine anyone shooting a team shot wanting to use HSS (and I doubt very much those mono-blocks are HSS capable), and for group shots, I would _think_ you would the greater spread provided by a couple of large-ish diffusers to provide more even illumination across the faces of the team.


----------



## vipgraphx (Jan 24, 2014)

So tonight at the Soccer Game I look over before the game and see this






The School Actually has these for their year book committee. I thought to myself why wouldn't they just have the students take the team pictures. 

Any who, I think there are a bunch of dishonest people here. Acting like they have never judged anyone for anything. Nothing but Saints I suppose.

I don't care Ill be honest I judge people all the time SO WHAT. We all have levels of expectations on what we want and expect out of life. I expect NO less than quality work.
THE REASON I said _*"Now I am thinking he is either really good and needs no professional camera"*_  This is what I a said in my original post. I will not know until we get the pictures back. Then and only then will I truly know if he knows his stuff.

This was the whole point of the thread to see who would be honest or dishonest. Who would say I was wrong for have such horrible thoughts in my head or who would agree with them.

Seems like it went in a whole other direction...


I still live by the motto &#8230;..appearance and first impression is everything.


----------



## Robin Usagani (Jan 24, 2014)

tirediron said:


> Yesssss...  good points, BUT...  I can't imagine anyone shooting a team shot wanting to use HSS (and I doubt very much those mono-blocks are HSS capable), and for group shots, I would _think_ you would the greater spread provided by a couple of large-ish diffusers to provide more even illumination across the faces of the team.



My bad.. i thought the guy was shooting the sport.. not the group.


----------



## Bossy (Jan 24, 2014)

I honestly don't judge on this in particular, of course I judge on a good number of other things but you didn't ask about them. 


And to be fair, the photographers first impression was likely the portfolio he showed to get hired. Not the attire or gear he showed up with once he had the gig


----------



## e.rose (Jan 24, 2014)

Bossy said:


> I honestly don't judge on this in particular, of course I judge on a good number of other things but you didn't ask about them.
> 
> 
> And to be fair, the photographers first impression was likely the portfolio he showed to get hired. Not the attire or gear he showed up with once he had the gig



Exactly. I mean, I'm judging right now... but ain't nobody wanna talk about that. :lmao:


----------



## minicoop1985 (Jan 24, 2014)

Are you going to see this photo before the yearbook comes out? I'm intrigued.

That does baffle me that the school wouldn't just have those kids shoot it with that stuff. I'm sure one of those has to be full frame, if not all of them.


----------



## e.rose (Jan 24, 2014)

minicoop1985 said:


> Are you going to see this photo before the yearbook comes out? I'm intrigued.
> 
> That does baffle me that the school wouldn't just have those kids shoot it with that stuff. I'm sure one of those has to be full frame, if not all of them.



Because the school doesn't have access to photo product (Pins, Calendars, Prints, Mugs, Faux Sports Cards, etc.) like the Lifetouch dude/photographer-with-access-to-a-lab-with-product-does.

And parents eat that sh*t up.


----------



## TheFantasticG (Jan 25, 2014)

vipgraphx said:


> So tonight at the Soccer Game I look over before the game and see this  http://s83.photobucket.com/user/q45t07/media/IMG_3666_zpsdc344630.jpg.html  The School Actually has these for their year book committee. I thought to myself why wouldn't they just have the students take the team pictures.  Any who, I think there are a bunch of dishonest people here. Acting like they have never judged anyone for anything. Nothing but Saints I suppose.  I don't care Ill be honest I judge people all the time SO WHAT. We all have levels of expectations on what we want and expect out of life. I expect NO less than quality work. THE REASON I said "Now I am thinking he is either really good and needs no professional camera"  This is what I a said in my original post. I will not know until we get the pictures back. Then and only then will I truly know if he knows his stuff.  This was the whole point of the thread to see who would be honest or dishonest. Who would say I was wrong for have such horrible thoughts in my head or who would agree with them.  Seems like it went in a whole other direction...   I still live by the motto &hellip;..appearance and first impression is everything.



Like I said, everybody does it. It's human nature. Maybe to varying degrees but everyone does whether they accept it or not.

One profession that does it quite a bit is car sales. I use to sale cars. Every single one of them pre judged their potential customers by how the dressed, what they drove to the dealerships, and how they carried themselves so they had a pre determination on if they should push them towards higher dollar cars or not.


----------



## The_Traveler (Jan 25, 2014)

Judging people is a natural thing, acting on that prejudice without any more information or knowledge is wrong.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 25, 2014)

vipgraphx said:


> Any who, I think there are a bunch of dishonest people here. Acting like they have never judged anyone for anything. Nothing but Saints I suppose.



Well I was up for canonization but lost out to Elizabeth Ann Seton.  It's such a popularity contest - really.  Worse than the Grammy's.  The only way your beating her in a straight up vote is if you've got a real ace in the hole, you know, like I worked with lepers.  I mean seriously, where the heck am I going to find a bunch of lepers to help.  Do you have any idea how hard it is to find lepers in Nebraska?



> I don't care Ill be honest I judge people all the time SO WHAT.  We all have levels of expectations on what we want and expect out of life. I expect NO less than quality work.
> THE REASON I said _*"Now I am thinking he is either really good and needs no professional camera"*_  This is what I a said in my original post. I will not know until we get the pictures back. Then and only then will I truly know if he knows his stuff.



Well a lot of folks have made the point that what really matters is the end result, and I don't disagree with that - however I think there is another valid point here in that when you wish to portray yourself as a professional anything image plays a part in that.  If I went to doctor and I was sitting in the exam room and he walked in wearing a pair of cut off khaki's, a really in inappropriate T-shirt and had dozens of facial peircings, I'd be beating feet for the door.  I wouldn't really care about his qualifications or how good of a doctor he supposedly is because he's already presented himself in a very unprofessional manner.

Now on the photography side of the fence honestly most people who don't know cameras (which is most people) couldn't tell a D3000 from a hole in the ground, but for those of us who do know seeing something like that it would only be natural that it would give us reason for pause.  Sure, the guy might be really skilled and might be able to get some great pictures with it - but it really doesn't convey the message "I'm a serious professional" to someone who knows enough to know what a D3000 is, how much it costs and what it's limitations are.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 25, 2014)

Bossy said:


> I honestly don't judge on this in particular, of course I judge on a good number of other things but you didn't ask about them.
> 
> 
> And to be fair, the photographers first impression was likely the portfolio he showed to get hired. Not the attire or gear he showed up with once he had the gig



Well, until he shows up to shoot your wedding in a Speedo.  Lol


----------



## rexbobcat (Jan 25, 2014)

vipgraphx said:


> So tonight at the Soccer Game I look over before the game and see this
> 
> 
> 
> ...




How does disagreeing with your judgment threaten your right to judge? Just because people judge doesn't make that judgment correct and assumptions make and ass out of you and me. Isn't that how the saying goes?

And damn right I'm a saint. My mama tells me every day that I'm a special, one-of-a-kind boy.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 25, 2014)

I don't necessarily agree that the lights need diffusion for an outdoor, team photo. I really,really mean that. If the flash is being used just to fill in the shadowed side of the players in that bright Arizona sunshine, and to give good, clean color, then no, umbrellas are not really all that needed. A good, well-designed parabolic reflector from 15 to 20 feet distant will provide perfectly fine fill light.

Some of the higher-end banquet and large-group and team photographer specialists in fact, use simple "pencil light heads", with basically, a flat, white, or silvered FLAT reflector behind the flashtube.

There was not that long ago, a fellow who made and sold custom pencil heads, which had white, FLAT, reflectors that went right behind the flashtube. Not all that large, these simple reflectors basically took a 360 degree flashtube, and bounced the back side's 180 degrees of light forward, and made some GORGEOUS team photos, with the light just placed high up on a tall stand....basically simulating sunlight. I tried to find his website today, but could not. ANyway, he had a great story on there about the way the old-time professional master photographers used to light huge banquet and fraternal organization groups, with ONE, single light placed very high up, like on a 13 to 20 foot stand, so that the shadows on foreground members fell DOWN and BEHIND, immediately, so that nobody ever had a shadow from the light being blocked by the man or woman immediately in front of him or her. 

This also creates a very good nose, and chin-shadow, which helps to define the mask of the face by creating a nice, dark under-chin shadow, due to the very high main light placement. We see this type of crisp, hard-shadowed main lighting nowadays mostly on high-end beauty and cosmetics shots, where a hard light is placed high-up, and there's a strong, very dark under-chin shadow that makes the face just "Pop!" in relief against the shadow.

I dunno...maybe this guy was an idiot...we have not seen any photos...how can we know how well he used his equipment until we SEE a picture????


----------



## Ihatemymoney (Jan 25, 2014)

Were you on the clock when you decided to harass this man and try to publicly embarrass him ?
I cant wait until your bosses read this.......


----------



## vipgraphx (Jan 25, 2014)

Ihatemymoney said:


> Were you on the clock when you decided to harass this man and try to publicly embarrass him ?
> I cant wait until your bosses read this.......




I did not harass anyone! Your just acting like a troll!


----------



## Ihatemymoney (Jan 25, 2014)

That's not the way I see it.   You posting how you judge everyone on (your) first impressions of them. 

If your coaching is so important then why did you take pictures of this guy.  That is your paid job ?
Then you posted the mans face on a public forum making fun of him and wanting everyone to judge him as you did.


----------



## Bossy (Jan 25, 2014)

Well this conversation took a weird turn.


----------



## vipgraphx (Jan 25, 2014)

Ihatemymoney said:


> That's not the way I see it.   You posting how you judge everyone on (your) first impressions of them.
> 
> If your coaching is so important then why did you take pictures of this guy.  That is your paid job ?
> Then you posted the mans face on a public forum making fun of him and wanting everyone to judge him as you did.




You can see it how you want and I can still think your just trolling this thread. You have not offered anything other than a few ridiculous comments. 

I don't have any bosses, I own my own business. What are you going to go and tattle on me for having some thoughts&#8230;They going to punish me&#8230;Thats not my main source of income.

If you would like I could troll your threads.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 25, 2014)

Bossy said:


> Well this conversation took a weird turn.



Yup.  Rather ironic though, how you've got one guy judging another guy for judging yet another guy.  Could just be me of course.. lol


----------



## vipgraphx (Jan 25, 2014)

robbins.photo said:


> Bossy said:
> 
> 
> > Well this conversation took a weird turn.
> ...



yes this is ironic and at least I was the honest one. Never would I thought it come to this. I just said out loud what often times so many people think.


It could have been different&#8230;I could have said this.

Man this guy with this HUGE lens must be a pro because of his equipment&#8230;Look at that lens and pro body.






Then I bet people would develop a totally different thought about him being a pro just because of his lens and camera.

Go figure.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 25, 2014)

This thread is headed toward the ridiculous...man...oh, man...this has just gotten way out of hand. We ALL "judge" and evaluate dozens to hundreds of people and situations and interactions each and every day...that's the way people work...that's how we stay safe, avoid accidents in traffic, avoid getting ripped off, decide who to associate with, and so on and so on, and so on...Jeebus...


----------



## Zyr55 (Jan 25, 2014)

I feel sorry for that guy, his picture is posted on public forum and judged just because he is using D3000 with kit lens. SMH.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 25, 2014)

Derrel said:


> This thread is headed toward the ridiculous...man...oh, man...this has just gotten way out of hand. We ALL "judge" and evaluate dozens to hundreds of people and situations and interactions each and every day...that's the way people work...that's how we stay safe, avoid accidents in traffic, avoid getting ripped off, decide who to associate with, and so on and so on, and so on...Jeebus...



It's what they pay me to do at work actually - Fraud Detection.  I make a pretty decent living judging hundreds and hundreds of people I've never met every day.  Plus, free coffee.  So yup, like my job.. lol


----------



## 2310Return (Jan 25, 2014)

So - those that would be judgemental about people arriving for a shoot with particular equipment... (which is your prerogative - I'm not criticising you for that opinion.)

Please could I ask - what is the minimum standard of Canon / Nikon body and lens which would be deemed to be an acceptable minimum for this type of photo shoot?

Genuinely curious to know!


----------



## Steve5D (Jan 25, 2014)

I can honestly say that I never worry about what other photographers are doing, or what gear they're doing it with. Could I do better than them? Maybe, maybe not. Quite honestly, I don't know and I don't care.

In this scenario, _someone _is comfortable paying him _some _amount of money to shoot, so good for him.

Worrying about what other photographers are doing is an utter waste of time, and I just don't see the point in it...


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 25, 2014)

2310Return said:


> So - those that would be judgemental about people arriving for a shoot with particular equipment... (which is your prerogative - I'm not criticising you for that opinion.)
> 
> Please could I ask - what is the minimum standard of Canon / Nikon body and lens which would be deemed to be an acceptable minimum for this type of photo shoot?
> 
> Genuinely curious to know!



Well a D3000 would do the job in the hands of someone skilled enough to use it - thing is though it's a rather old entry level DSLR so it would be a rather odd choice overall for someone who makes a living taking pictures.  I would assume that even if the D3000 were his first DSLR if he'd met with any success at all as a paid, professional photographer he'd most likely would have upgraded at some stage, I mean the camera was released back in 2009 and is pretty outdated now - and it's not like you need a bundle of money to step up to something like a D5100 or something of that nature, they are dirt cheap for a DSLR.  

I guess I wouldn't find it quite so curious if he'd had something like a D200 or D300, they are both older cameras as well but I'd be more likely to believe he's actually got the skills to make some money at photography and just didn't feel the need to upgrade if he were using an older more professional body as opposed to something that was an entry level offering even when it was brand new.  

Who knows, the guy might be a primo photographer and for whatever reason just loves the D3000 and doesn't want to give it up.  I just wouldn't be willing to bet on it is all I'm saying.. lol


----------



## Steve5D (Jan 25, 2014)

vipgraphx said:


> Who would say I was wrong for have such horrible thoughts in my head or who would agree with them



You're being a bit over-dramatic, don't you think?

Has anyone said your thoughts were "evil"? I guess I could've missed it, but I don't believe that's happened.

You asked if you were wrong. If you're only going to get your panties in a knot if someone says you _are_, then you probably shouldn't ask the question...


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 25, 2014)

Steve5D said:


> I can honestly say that I never worry about what other photographers are doing, or what gear they're doing it with. Could I do better than them? Maybe, maybe not. Quite honestly, I don't know and I don't care.
> 
> In this scenario, _someone _is comfortable paying his _some _amount of money to shoot, so good for him.
> 
> Worrying about what other photographers are doing is an utter waste of time, and I just don't see the point in it...



Well so far it's been good for a laugh or two and it's kept me harmlessly occupied and distracted enough that I haven't had time to really continue my evil planning for total world domination.  Plus I made Nacho's, so win win really.. lol


----------



## Steve5D (Jan 25, 2014)

robbins.photo said:


> It's what they pay me to do at work actually - Fraud Detection.  I make a pretty decent living judging hundreds and hundreds of people I've never met every day.  Plus, free coffee.  So yup, like my job.. lol



That sounds like a gig I could get on board with...


----------



## vipgraphx (Jan 25, 2014)

Zyr55 said:


> I feel sorry for that guy, his picture is posted on public forum and judged just because he is using D3000 with kit lens. SMH.



Why do you fell sorry for this guy. I all ready deleted his face and besides its not like he is going to lose any business just because of this thread. No of you would even know how to contact him if they wanted to.

Honestly when I posted the original picture it was for the set up not him. I honestly did not think about him. Once it was mentioned I changed out his face.


----------



## vipgraphx (Jan 25, 2014)

Steve5D said:


> You're being a bit over-dramatic, don't you think?



Maybe just maybe.



Steve5D said:


> You asked if you were wrong. If you're only going to get your panties in a knot if someone says you _are_, then you probably shouldn't ask the question...




Im not getting my boxers in a knot sorry I don't wear panties..:thumbup:


----------



## pixmedic (Jan 25, 2014)

:hugs:  :hug::  hug it out people.


----------



## Steve5D (Jan 25, 2014)

vipgraphx said:


> Steve5D said:
> 
> 
> > You're being a bit over-dramatic, don't you think?
> ...



Maybe, next time, a  reasonable approach would be for you to just stop worrying about him. Let _him _do _his _job while _you _do _yours_...


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 25, 2014)

Steve5D said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> > It's what they pay me to do at work actually - Fraud Detection.  I make a pretty decent living judging hundreds and hundreds of people I've never met every day.  Plus, free coffee.  So yup, like my job.. lol
> ...



I really enjoy it - I'd stay even if I had to pay for coffee.. lol.  Honestly it's lightyears away from anything I'd imagined I'd be doing at this stage in life, but I guess having such a finally tuned BS detector came in handy after all.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 25, 2014)

This entire thread made me think back to the episode of Judge Joe Brown from 2010, the one where a couple was suing a cut-rate wedding photographer who had prints made at WalMart, and who shot the wedding using a Canon Digital Rebel and 18-55 and 70-300 zooms, but under questioning by JUdge Brown, did not know the lens speeds of her gear, and who had no flash, and so on. The entire episode got HUGE play here on TPF< and indeed, all over the photography web and blogs. The video has since been pulled from YouTube due to multiple copyright infringement claims, but this blog has some of the highlights:

Throwing Other Photographers Under the Bus May be Great Fun, But Is It a Good Thing? | ESSENTIALS For Photographers


----------



## vipgraphx (Jan 25, 2014)

2310Return said:


> So - those that would be judgemental about people arriving for a shoot with particular equipment... (which is your prerogative - I'm not criticising you for that opinion.)
> 
> Please could I ask - what is the minimum standard of Canon / Nikon body and lens which would be deemed to be an acceptable minimum for this type of photo shoot?
> 
> Genuinely curious to know!



As far as the requirement would probably be some sort of pro body DX or FF that We ALL know which ones regardless if its older or newer. Defiantly not a kit lens! At least a 35 1.8 lens would be good at the very least. 

I did not put to much thought into that but I know if I would have seen a D200 with a 35mm I would not have even thought about it.


----------



## BillM (Jan 25, 2014)




----------



## vipgraphx (Jan 25, 2014)

Steve5D said:


> vipgraphx said:
> 
> 
> > Steve5D said:
> ...



I will tell you what&#8230;.If you can honestly tell me you have never had a judgmental thought ever I will never judge another photographer again.

Deal?


----------



## vipgraphx (Jan 25, 2014)

Derrel said:


> This entire thread made me think back to the episode of Judge Joe Brown from 2010, the one where a couple was suing a cut-rate wedding photographer who had prints made at WalMart, and who shot the wedding using a Canon Digital Rebel and 18-55 and 70-300 zooms, but under questioning by JUdge Brown, did not know the lens speeds of her gear, and who had no flash, and so on. The entire episode got HUGE play here on TPF< and indeed, all over the photography web and blogs. The video has since been pulled from YouTube due to multiple copyright infringement claims, but this blog has some of the highlights:
> 
> Throwing Other Photographers Under the Bus May be Great Fun, But Is It a Good Thing? | ESSENTIALS For Photographers




I remember that and also there as another Judge show with a female judge. I can't remember here name but she is a hispanic judge. The episode was about wedding photographers taking pictures with an entry level DSLR and kit lens with a 55-200 zoom lens. 

The judge had a little more knowledge about photo gear , f-stops and what not. She even had questions about why were they *shooting and charging money for professional work with entry level gear* and her ruling was for the plaintiff.


----------



## Zyr55 (Jan 25, 2014)

vipgraphx said:


> Zyr55 said:
> 
> 
> > I feel sorry for that guy, his picture is posted on public forum and judged just because he is using D3000 with kit lens. SMH.
> ...


So much contradiction to what you are saying now than what you posted. You might want to read post #1.


----------



## limr (Jan 25, 2014)

I must confess. I totally judge people by their gear. Whenever I see a man with a pimped out DSLR and a massive lens, I think, "Now there is a professional photographer with a small penis."

There. I said it.


----------



## Steve5D (Jan 25, 2014)

vipgraphx said:


> Steve5D said:
> 
> 
> > vipgraphx said:
> ...



Why on earth would I do that? I judge people every single day.

The difference here, though, is that I don't give a rat's ass whether or not someone on the internet thinks I'm "wrong" for doing it. Clearly, you do, because you started an entire freaking thread about it. Tell ya' what: If you want to sleep better at night, if you're so concerned about whether or not he's the best choice for the gig, pull up your big boy pants and step in and set him straight, or do it yourself. 

Jesus H. Christ, these whiney "Look at THIS guy" threads are stupid, and reflect far more poorly on the person posting them than on the person depicted in them...


----------



## Steve5D (Jan 25, 2014)

limr said:


> I must confess. I totally judge people by their gear. Whenever I see a man with a pimped out DSLR and a massive lens, I think, "Now there is a professional photographer with a small penis."
> 
> There. I said it.



LOLOL!!


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 25, 2014)

limr said:


> I must confess. I totally judge people by their gear. Whenever I see a man with a pimped out DSLR and a massive lens, I think, "Now there is a professional photographer with a small penis."
> 
> There. I said it.



Ok so maybe I shouldn't be looking to get a 500 mm lens then?  Ah what the heck.  Not like I don't repel women with amazing speed already.. lol


----------



## limr (Jan 25, 2014)

A little somethin' for the ladies......awwwwwww yeahhhhhh....







Thanko MAME-CAM: World's Smallest Digital Camera | Digital Camera | Video Camera News


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 25, 2014)

Steve5D said:


> Jesus H. Christ



Huh.. any idea what the middle initial stands for there?  Because you know if it turns out to be something like Horace - well, I must admit that would be disappointing.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 25, 2014)

limr said:


> A little somethin' for the ladies......awwwwwww yeahhhhhh....
> 
> Thanko MAME-CAM: World's Smallest Digital Camera | Digital Camera | Video Camera News




Well I doubt the "If you want to see my camera you'll need to come closer" routine would work for me personally.  Now there's a good idea for a thread - camera related pickup lines... lol


----------



## limr (Jan 25, 2014)

robbins.photo said:


> limr said:
> 
> 
> > A little somethin' for the ladies......awwwwwww yeahhhhhh....
> ...



Men picking up men: "I'll show you my lens if you show me yours."
Men picking up women: "It's a zoom!"
Women picking up men: "My Canon body has slots for two SD cards."
Women picking up women: "You can borrow my soft box if you'd like."


----------



## Zyr55 (Jan 25, 2014)

...Don't have your Dad get punched over a can of soup, don't get caught using a kit lens on paid gig.


----------



## JacaRanda (Jan 25, 2014)

limr said:


> I must confess. I totally judge people by their gear. Whenever I see a man with a pimped out DSLR and a massive lens, I think, "Now there is a professional photographer with a small penis."
> 
> There. I said it.


  :lmao:  Leonore for Prez March - April 2014


----------



## JacaRanda (Jan 25, 2014)

rexbobcat said:


> vipgraphx said:
> 
> 
> > So tonight at the Soccer Game I look over before the game and see this
> ...


----------



## e.rose (Jan 25, 2014)

Steve5D said:


> Why on earth would I do that? I judge people every single day.  The difference here, though, is that I don't give a rat's ass whether or not someone on the internet thinks I'm "wrong" for doing it. Clearly, you do, because you started an entire freaking thread about it. Tell ya' what: If you want to sleep better at night, if you're so concerned about whether or not he's the best choice for the gig, pull up your big boy pants and step in and set him straight, or do it yourself.  Jesus H. Christ, these whiney "Look at THIS guy" threads are stupid, and reflect far more poorly on the person posting them than on the person depicted in them...



::slow clap:: (I wish there was an emoticon for this,haha) 

Sent from my iPhone using PhotoForum


----------



## kathyt (Jan 25, 2014)

Is this thread still lingering? People judge all the time. It is human nature. For someone to say that they don't on any level would be lying.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 25, 2014)

kathyt said:


> Is this thread still lingering? People judge all the time. It is human nature. For someone to say that they don't on any level would be lying.



Ok, so we can judge them for being liars then.. woohoo!  Win Win.  Synergy Dance!  Lol


----------



## kathyt (Jan 25, 2014)

robbins.photo said:


> kathyt said:
> 
> 
> > Is this thread still lingering? People judge all the time. It is human nature. For someone to say that they don't on any level would be lying.
> ...


I am not just talking about photography here. I am talking about life in general.


----------



## vipgraphx (Jan 25, 2014)

Steve5D said:


> vipgraphx said:
> 
> 
> > Steve5D said:
> ...


----------



## vipgraphx (Jan 25, 2014)

e.rose said:


> ::slow clap:: (I wish there was an emoticon for this,haha)
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using PhotoForum




What a fast clap is not good enough.? A slow clap is going to be soooo much better..:raisedbrow:


----------



## kathyt (Jan 25, 2014)

vipgraphx said:


> Steve5D said:
> 
> 
> > vipgraphx said:
> ...


----------



## vipgraphx (Jan 25, 2014)

kathyt said:


> vipgraphx said:
> 
> 
> > Steve5D said:
> ...


----------



## e.rose (Jan 25, 2014)

vipgraphx said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> > ::slow clap:: (I wish there was an emoticon for this,haha)
> ...



...What is this even supposed to mean?


----------



## vipgraphx (Jan 25, 2014)

e.rose said:


> ...What is this even supposed to mean?



UUmmm you tell me


----------



## Steve5D (Jan 25, 2014)

kathyt said:


> Is this thread still lingering? People judge all the time. It is human nature. For someone to say that they don't on any level would be lying.



Who's said they don't?


----------



## Steve5D (Jan 25, 2014)

vipgraphx said:


> Yeah, your right I remember him arguing with a guy named BYNX and it just was never ending.



Really?

Where's this Bynx guy now?


----------



## Steve5D (Jan 25, 2014)

kathyt said:


> You are wasting your time trying to argue with Steve. Move on. Trust me on this one.



TRANSLATION: "You're never going to convince Steve that your meaningless whining is anything but meaningless whining".

Got it...


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 26, 2014)

e.rose said:


> vipgraphx said:
> 
> 
> > e.rose said:
> ...



Wow.. really?  Have you people never seen an inspirational sports movie?  You never see them fast clap - it's always one guy who starts out real slow and then it speeds up and more people join in until the whole crowd is on it's feet usually celebrating the fact that the team you were supposed to be rooting for actually lost but that they tried their hardest and therefore deserved the accolades of the crowd anyway.

In short it's a device used strictly in movies because that crap never happens in real life and it usually falls flat in movies as well but it was a nice thought so we should all just smile and be happy.. lol


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 26, 2014)

Steve5D said:


> vipgraphx said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, your right I remember him arguing with a guy named BYNX and it just was never ending.
> ...



Umm.. hmm.. knowing this place I'm guessing unmarked grave.  That would be my guess at any rate.. lol


----------



## terri (Jan 26, 2014)

Ten pages, and it's going downhill fast.   

buh-bye!


----------

