# An "ah-ha" moment.



## dennybeall (Sep 6, 2014)

I have an idea why photography is slowly dying. 
As a contribution to the charity I spent the better part of the day shooting an Open House at a new dog training facility, 115 or so shots. Got home and worked the process through Photoshop cleaning up, straightening a tad here and there and fixing a red eye so had 35 or so nice shots. 
So the "ah-ha" moment! 
I go to the clients Facebook page and there are bunches of crappy photos, crooked, parts cut off, poor focus, bad lighting but many of the same scenes I have, just crappy versions. All taken with iPads and cell phones and put up on the net through the phone network moments after being taken.
Frankly, I feel like just throwing all my shots away. Sure, mine are better and the trash can is not in the 3rd shot and all the people in the group shots have good expressions but I don't think the people will care. They'll just think; Oh, I've seen that picture already.


----------



## astroNikon (Sep 6, 2014)

Yup, instantaneous photo gratification through social media which helps lower the expectations of photo quality.

I've felt that way many times shooting my kids soccer. Except I take much better action shots that are in focus, showing good action, and great shots .. versus all the misc junk.


----------



## Light Guru (Sep 6, 2014)

dennybeall said:


> I have an idea why photography is slowly dying.



Photography is ABSOLUTELY NOT dying. It is growing exponentially. More photos were taken today then were taken in the first 150 years of photography. I would hardly call that dying. 

The only thing that's dying is people's appreciation of good photography.


----------



## snowbear (Sep 6, 2014)

I don't feel that photography is dying, but it is getting away from being a craft.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Sep 6, 2014)

dennybeall said:


> ... but I don't think the people will care. They'll just think; Oh, I've seen that picture already.



So your "ah-ha" moment is just based on assumptions you believe to be true?


----------



## PaulWog (Sep 6, 2014)

Playing devil's advocate here: Some people don't care all the time. We don't need amazing photographs for every single event, all the time, everywhere. Sometimes people just want a snapshot.


----------



## robbins.photo (Sep 6, 2014)

dennybeall said:


> I have an idea why photography is slowly dying.
> As a contribution to the charity I spent the better part of the day shooting an Open House at a new dog training facility, 115 or so shots. Got home and worked the process through Photoshop cleaning up, straightening a tad here and there and fixing a red eye so had 35 or so nice shots.
> So the "ah-ha" moment!
> I go to the clients Facebook page and there are bunches of crappy photos, crooked, parts cut off, poor focus, bad lighting but many of the same scenes I have, just crappy versions. All taken with iPads and cell phones and put up on the net through the phone network moments after being taken.
> Frankly, I feel like just throwing all my shots away. Sure, mine are better and the trash can is not in the 3rd shot and all the people in the group shots have good expressions but I don't think the people will care. They'll just think; Oh, I've seen that picture already.



Ok, so we destroy the internet and then lynch Al Gore so it can never be created again.  Bam!  Synergy.  See, easy fix.


----------



## Derrel (Sep 6, 2014)

The rise of the 24-hour news cycle, followed by the development of the internet, then the rise of smart phones concurrent with the rise of social media platforms that allow instant access and publish of photos and text: all of these things have, over the last 20 years or so, fundamentally CHANGED the way people look at and view, store, and share photos. IMMEDIATE satisfaction, IMMEDIATE viewing has become expected on social media platforms, as well as on the world wide web, and also in person-to-person sharing. Again, the actual "way people look at photography" has shifted to looking at photos very soon after the photos have been taken; there is NO LONGER ANY tolerance for "waiting five days for prints." That era is dead. Immediate pictures are now expected in many situations, since we now have MANY people carrying smart phone cameras with instant access to sharing.


----------



## dennybeall (Sep 6, 2014)

Thank you, I appreciate the mostly interesting thoughtful comments. Not the one personal attack but that's to be expected.
A lot was left unsaid in the initial post and it was interesting how the responses varied. No question more photos are being taken considering the proliferation of cell phone and tablet cameras. Are those as good as used to be taken or as are still being taken by trained photographers? Some are but most don't seem to be from what I see. The point being that peoples expectations are changing to fit the new norm and that's changing just about every aspect of photography as we knew it.
Interesting times, glad I don't have to make a living from it anymore.


----------



## pthrift (Sep 6, 2014)

My thought is this- there are now more people taking pictures.  Is quality degrading?  Maybe, overall, it is. 

But the upside to more people taking pics is that the manufacturers (nikon, canon, et al.) have to notice and try to get at least some of these cell phone camera folks to go to maybe a p&s; or dslr; or etc. 

That means they will (more than likely) make more affordable options. I mean; back in the early 2000s how much was a bare bones basic dslr? Vs now you can get a complete kit for $350 brand new.   

Again- this doesn't draw the best people all the time but it does bring more people;  more mfgr support, and ultimately more options to the market. 

That also means you have more people looking at photographs- granted again; they don't all have the "eye" of an art gallery shopper, but they are looking.  


The way I see it business is booming.  From a pro standpoint I'm sure there is a completely different outlook than what I have; but from my amateur seat; I'm loving it-


----------



## baturn (Sep 6, 2014)

Well, in my experience the folks who snapped photos with their phones (standing right beside me), later, when comparing photos, still say " Wow, you must have a really nice camera".


----------



## Designer (Sep 7, 2014)

dennybeall said:


> Frankly, I feel like just throwing all my shots away.



I think you should give your photographs to the facility directly, and suggest that they SELL them to raise money.  If anybody wants better pictures, then they can pay for them.


----------



## photoguy99 (Sep 7, 2014)

What is the value in a 'better' photograph of some ordinary event? What is the purpose of a photo of some kids soccer game, and does it particularly serve that purpose to be 'better'?

This is a serious question. Albeit rhetorical.


----------



## bribrius (Sep 7, 2014)

what is lost is the romanticism. Hard to say something is dying when there are more photos than ever before. The craft or romanticism might be dying or lessening perhaps. 
you used to go to your local hardware store, pick out your item (they only had one version to pick from) and bring it home. Then you went to your big box store which had five versions to pick from. Then you went online which had fifty versions. While the quality is dropping in the majority of all these versions from the original they have become more accessible, lower cost, and still serve the general principle purpose for which they are made. 

If one seeks the hand made, hand crafted or highest quality they can still be found. But for the majority of people, and uses such a item is unnecessary as the cheap throw away version does near the same task. Minds have changed toward results that does not revolve around quality but rather price, accessibility, and serving and purpose.


----------



## photoguy99 (Sep 7, 2014)

The snapshot has always been with us. For documenting the everyday the professional's edge, and the interested amateur's edge, was speed. Mom's instamatic would not get its film developed into next January. 

This has changed. Mom and her iPhone have the speed edge now. And nothing else matters. Your $2000 rig and Photoshop aren't adding any value that anyone cares about - or ever did care about.


----------



## 407370 (Sep 7, 2014)

photoguy99 said:


> The snapshot has always been with us. For documenting the everyday the professional's edge, and the interested amateur's edge, was speed. Mom's instamatic would not get its film developed into next January.
> 
> This has changed. Mom and her iPhone have the speed edge now. And nothing else matters. Your $2000 rig and Photoshop aren't adding any value that anyone cares about - or ever did care about.



I have to take issue with that.....

So there was an event. Carol singing in the desert. Miles out into the desert about 1000 expats decide to have a sing song in Qatar around Christmas time. See below snapshots equivalent to what everyone took that day and posted onto facebook / instagram etc etc:




But.......

I took the following photo:



At long range handheld and processed to bring out the contrast between figures and sky.

I must have given out 100 copies of that file to people who were there that night.

I was not the only photographer there and a lot of people had a lot more expensive kit than me but I was the only one who got "THE" shot that everyone wanted.

My rig got the shot and over 100 people did care about it.


----------



## photoguy99 (Sep 7, 2014)

I am talking in general terms. You are talking about a specific.


----------



## bribrius (Sep 7, 2014)

I actually kind of like a couple of the other photos more than the silhouette. The silhouette thing is kind of overdone.  :razz:


----------



## Nevermore1 (Sep 7, 2014)

I think that while there are more photos being taken the quality of them are down.  My oldest is taking photography in HS this year and it is hard for me to believe that they are letting the kids use their iPhones for the class.  I gave my daughter my old Canon 20D to use and her teacher didn't know how to use it.  I forgot to change the file type to JPEG from RAW and she is having to redo her in class assignment because "it's not fair to others that you have a real camera" (she has to redo it in JPEG, I'm just going to convert it for her instead).  The average person is happy with cell phone pics now.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Sep 7, 2014)

No. The average person is happy with sharing pics of what's happening now, now.
The average person who took happy family snaps with film, never cared about the quality of images
they got with their Instamatic, and flash cubes. That has not changed.
These same average people didn't care about professional photography then, and they don't now.

What has changed, is the average person has a camera with them at all times, and can share more, to more people, and faster.

It has everything to do with emotions, and nothing to do with quality.


----------



## Kendall9991 (Sep 7, 2014)

dennybeall said:


> I have an idea why photography is slowly dying.
> As a contribution to the charity I spent the better part of the day shooting an Open House at a new dog training facility, 115 or so shots. Got home and worked the process through Photoshop cleaning up, straightening a tad here and there and fixing a red eye so had 35 or so nice shots.
> So the "ah-ha" moment!
> I go to the clients Facebook page and there are bunches of crappy photos, crooked, parts cut off, poor focus, bad lighting but many of the same scenes I have, just crappy versions. All taken with iPads and cell phones and put up on the net through the phone network moments after being taken.
> Frankly, I feel like just throwing all my shots away. Sure, mine are better and the trash can is not in the 3rd shot and all the people in the group shots have good expressions but I don't think the people will care. They'll just think; Oh, I've seen that picture already.


I fel the same way sometimes. I mean, im guilty of some but thats why the type of pictures I like are out where (most) no one else goes. Middle of the forest, abandoned buildings in the ghetto, backroads away from anything etc.





PaulWog said:


> Playing devil's advocate here: Some people don't care all the time. We don't need amazing photographs for every single event, all the time, everywhere. Sometimes people just want a snapshot.



Agree with this too though. Guess it depends on the circumstances


----------



## timor (Sep 7, 2014)

photoguy99 said:


> What is the value in a 'better' photograph of some ordinary event? What is the purpose of a photo of some kids soccer game, and does it particularly serve that purpose to be 'better'?
> 
> This is a serious question. Albeit rhetorical.


That's the bases of "store talk" I witness time to time. People rather want tool to "make" better pictures, than learn how-to. Honestly, for average person, it is logical, most people are not enthusiasts of arts nor artistic photography in particular. They are just enthusiasts of their camera phones.


----------



## Derrel (Sep 7, 2014)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> No. The average person is happy with sharing pics of what's happening now, now.
> The average person who took happy family snaps with film, never cared about the quality of images
> they got with their Instamatic, and flash cubes. That has not changed.
> These same average people didn't care about professional photography then, and they don't now.
> ...




THIS^^^^^ to the tenth power!!!


----------



## vintagesnaps (Sep 7, 2014)

Posting photos on social media seems to be today's equivalent to sitting in somebody's family room watching slides and home movies, the difference being that it used to only be friends and relatives that were subjected to it! LOL now we all get to see everybody's snapshots! I find it fun when it's somebody I know and they post pictures of their kids etc., but when it's people you don't know to me it seems to lose its charm. 

For a charity event it probably depends on if it's allowed to bring cameras and take pictures, then everybody's going to want to share and post pictures on the event page. If a charity wants photos for other purposes, such as to use on their own website to promote their services, or in a brochure, or for prints to display in their building, etc. then it might be worth seeing if they want some quality photos taken. Otherwise their social media page(s) will more likely be used for attendees to post their snapshots just for fun and it might not be worth taking pictures just for that.


----------



## minicoop1985 (Sep 7, 2014)

I do feel like great photos are getting lost in a sea of crappy ones of the same things. There's an observation tower about 20 minutes away from here. I wanna go and take some pictures there, but I imagine 30,000 people have done that with their camera phones or point and shoots, so it's nothing unique or even interesting at this point because it's been beaten to death.


----------



## Scatterbrained (Sep 7, 2014)

minicoop1985 said:


> I do feel like great photos are getting lost in a sea of crappy ones of the same things. There's an observation tower about 20 minutes away from here. I wanna go and take some pictures there, but I imagine 30,000 people have done that with their camera phones or point and shoots, so it's nothing unique or even interesting at this point because it's been beaten to death.


You just have to put your own twist on it.    I can't remember if it was on this board or not, but there's a guy who did a Milky Way shot of a functioning lighthouse.   I'd imagine tons of people have taken photos of that lighthouse, but it was his night time shot with the milkyway and the light of the lighthouse that stands out.


----------



## dennybeall (Sep 7, 2014)

Documentation versus Art.?
 Used to be a photographer could make pretty good money at either or both. Now the cell phone and iPad cameras have pretty well eaten up the documentation side of the craft. Newspapers hardly have any Staff Photographers anymore ( I hear my Dad rolling over in his grave) especially at the local level. Our local paper solicits cellphone snaps for news events and handed their reporters a little pocket camera to replace the photographer that used to accompany them.
If I was looking to make a living at photography these days I'd look at the ART side of the business. Art includes weddings in my book by the way. There also may be some good work using Photoshop to fix some of the stuff that comes out of the flashing, clicking hoard.


----------



## Forkie (Sep 8, 2014)

Actually, I think that it's all the crappy Facebook pictures that makes photographer's shots stand out.


----------



## timor (Sep 8, 2014)

Forkie said:


> Actually, I think that it's all the crappy Facebook pictures that makes photographer's shots stand out.


The problem is to sort them out from all that chaff.. Then, everyone can have different definition of "non crappy" photograph. Looks to me, that this is the blessing and curse at the same time of today's digital, mass produced, and shared, photography.
Just guys, sift through our C&C section how many photographs were posted and OP never returned to see the comments. This is, how people treat own photography.


----------



## Civchic (Sep 8, 2014)

I just really like nice pictures to document my own life and family.  That's why I picked up a camera.  Also, I like a challenge, and learning new things, and I needed a hobby.  Ta da!  Photography.

I print "family" albums every three months - about 80 pages of family outings, random shots, and photo walks.  They're pretty much pointless to anyone but myself and my immediate family.  But I am proud and happy that they are turning out to be beautiful books with pretty pictures - better than snapshot in some cases, and above average snapshots in the rest.    I also share on social media for friends and family, and I get appreciation now and then.

So I will continue to try to improve my own craft, even if the only people who care in the future are my children.  At least I made beautiful books for them to look back on and enjoy.


----------



## pgriz (Sep 8, 2014)

dennybeall said:


> I have an idea why photography is slowly dying.
> As a contribution to the charity I spent the better part of the day shooting an Open House at a new dog training facility, 115 or so shots. Got home and worked the process through Photoshop cleaning up, straightening a tad here and there and fixing a red eye so had 35 or so nice shots.
> So the "ah-ha" moment!
> I go to the clients Facebook page and there are bunches of crappy photos, crooked, parts cut off, poor focus, bad lighting but many of the same scenes I have, just crappy versions. All taken with iPads and cell phones and put up on the net through the phone network moments after being taken.
> Frankly, I feel like just throwing all my shots away. Sure, mine are better and the trash can is not in the 3rd shot and all the people in the group shots have good expressions but I don't think the people will care. They'll just think; Oh, I've seen that picture already.



I think Bitter Jeweler has it pegged.  There's a difference between sharing a moment (via smartphone, ipad, social media), and creating an image for keeping and creating an "official" record.  Just been at a wedding this weekend.  There were official photographers (two of them, loaded with gear and light equipment).  There were the family photographers (that's me).  There were the casual snapshooters (pretty much everyone else there) with their Iphones, Ipads, Android devices, P&S, and a few DSLR's.  The pros will produce the official moments and occasion images.  The family photog (that's me again), produces the un-official headshots, group shots, dancing shots, lampshade-on-head moments, and general shots which will be meaningless to anyone who was not there.  And of course, everyone else was snapping with their favourite method of image capture and sharing THOSE with the rest of the hoi-polloi who couldn't be there.  In my role as the family recordmaker, I will produce a CD of images for each branch of the family that attended (at least 8 by my count), which they then can disseminate as needed/wanted.   

My skill level is somewhere between the pros and the "everyone else" group. Usually my images are pretty decent, and will show up on various family blogs and cell-phones, but most probably will never be printed.  That's OK too.  The official photographers will produce what they are paid to produce and those WILL DEFINITELY be printed.  These are/will the the "trophy" shots that are trotted out on formal (or bragging) occasions. My stuff will be looked at whenever any of the participants wants to remember who was there, what they wore and how they looked - in other words, mainly family snapshots.  And the other stuff, will pop up on Facebook or other sites to tell "hey, I went to a good wedding this weekend!".


----------



## Civchic (Sep 8, 2014)

_My skill level is somewhere between the pros and the "everyone else" group. Usually my images are pretty decent, and will show up on various family blogs and cell-phones, but most probably will never be printed. That's OK too. The official photographers will produce what they are paid to produce and those WILL DEFINITELY be printed. These are/will the the "trophy" shots that are trotted out on formal (or bragging) occasions. My stuff will be looked at whenever any of the participants wants to remember who was there, what they wore and how they looked - in other words, mainly family snapshots. And the other stuff, will pop up on Facebook or other sites to tell "hey, I went to a good wedding this weekend!"._

THIS is really well said.  I aim for what you've described yourself as.  

Also, at family events where a photographer is not hired (birthday parties, anniversaries, backyard BBQs) your (and my) photos might be the best there is.  Even if they aren't printed, it's important (to me).  Is it so weird that I would rather have a NICE snapshot than a crappy one?

For my grandfather's 85th birthday golf tournament I took pictures, especially tee shots.  They're not fabulous, there's plenty to critique about them.  But they're in focus, bright, recognizable shots of a person hitting a golf ball.  For most of my family, they're the best (only) shot they have of themselves teeing off at a golf tournament.  For a couple of weeks, at least 8 of my cousins were using a photo of mine as their Facebook profile.  Not exactly shooting for the photographic stars, there, but it still makes me smile.


----------



## Derrel (Sep 8, 2014)

Civchic said:
			
		

> For a couple of weeks, at least 8 of my cousins were using a photo of mine as their Facebook profile.  Not exactly shooting for the photographic stars, there, but it still makes me smile.



Yeah, see, now THAT is a very specific and a very good example of the *new way people use photographs*. Facebook profile photos! A photo that people feel so positively toward, that they feel makes them LOOK GOOD, a photo that they willingly select, to actually be their face, or their on-line representation. See, we have not had that kind of thing for all that long. That is a relatively new way to use photos, a way to use photos that never existed until the internet era was somewhat mature.

I think it's sometimes difficult for people to appreciate what is meant by "New ways of looking at photos", and also hard to appreciate what is meant by the phrase, "New way of using photos". we've come pretty far into the internet era, but back in the dial-up modem days of the mid-1990's, instant-on internet was NOT the way things were. And neither was motion video! And opening even relatively small images took a lot of computing power. Images were mostly SMALL, and fairly low-resolution by today's standards. Monitors were mostly 15-inchers. We are 20+ years into a technological revolution, and yet our thoughts about things are often not very deep or complicated with regard to what photographs are to us, today. It seems to me that many people who are old enough to remember rolls of color prints developed for $10.99 for 36 pictures, or $7.99 on sale with a coupon, are not fully grasping that that type of adoration of high-quality, low-in-number images is an old, now-gone affectation, an historical relic.


----------



## jake337 (Sep 8, 2014)

Sorry I didn't read anything but the OP.  

Maybe when you are shooting in a similar situation you might have to start shooting differently.  

Next time try shooting with a WiFi SD card.  Try to keep horizons straight and expose as desired.  You can now beat them to the punch with better quality images.  

Similar to how some Pro sports photographers work.


----------



## jake337 (Sep 8, 2014)

minicoop1985 said:


> I do feel like great photos are getting lost in a sea of crappy ones of the same things. There's an observation tower about 20 minutes away from here. I wanna go and take some pictures there, but I imagine 30,000 people have done that with their camera phones or point and shoots, so it's nothing unique or even interesting at this point because it's been beaten to death.



In sure 30,000+ images of Thors Well have been created but Majeed's seem to be doing better than everyone else's on 500px for some reason?

Check out this awesome photo from 500px: http://500px.com/photo/27282213


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Sep 8, 2014)

dennybeall said:


> I have an idea why photography is slowly dying.
> As a contribution to the charity I spent the better part of the day shooting an Open House at a new dog training facility, 115 or so shots. Got home and worked the process through Photoshop cleaning up, straightening a tad here and there and fixing a red eye so had 35 or so nice shots.
> So the "ah-ha" moment!
> I go to the clients Facebook page and there are bunches of crappy photos, crooked, parts cut off, poor focus, bad lighting but many of the same scenes I have, just crappy versions. All taken with iPads and cell phones and put up on the net through the phone network moments after being taken.
> Frankly, I feel like just throwing all my shots away. Sure, mine are better and the trash can is not in the 3rd shot and all the people in the group shots have good expressions but I don't think the people will care. They'll just think; Oh, I've seen that picture already.



People see millions of photos in their lifetime. Even if they can't always quantify what makes a good photo good, they still generally know the difference between quality and crap. So, post quality, and let others do their thing. Not your concern.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Sep 9, 2014)

PaulWog said:


> Playing devil's advocate here: Some people don't care all the time. We don't need amazing photographs for every single event, all the time, everywhere. Sometimes people just want a snapshot.



I try and produce amazing images at every event I shoot, perhaps this is the difference in the thinking of a professional compared to an amateur.


----------



## runnah (Sep 9, 2014)

Just another cane shaker lamenting the days of yore.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Sep 9, 2014)

People will always have room for excellent images. The images posted on face book or instagram for the most part are the same as what people used to get printed put in little albums and showed the relatives, they are snapshots, and they do serve a purpose, and they are as important to a lot of people as my high end images are to the people that hire me. My last five big shoots I produced some great images, a lot of them, and I had a lot of positive feedback. I posted some of them on face book and had more positive feedback. People still see and understand quality images, I have started to notice that more people are drifting back to that way of thinking. Maybe it's just a cycle photography is going through, but people are starting to appreciate good images again, I think we have face book and instagram to thank for that, people are seeing so much crap now that when they see images that are well put together that doesn't have some lame special effect added they do see the difference.

Will photography ever go back to the way it was, no, not a chance, will great images always be needed, absolutely. I have to believe this otherwise why do I keep working so hard at it.


----------



## Civchic (Sep 9, 2014)

> Maybe it's just a cycle photography is going through, but people are starting to appreciate good images again, I think we have face book and instagram to thank for that, people are seeing so much crap now that when they see images that are well put together that doesn't have some lame special effect added they do see the difference.
> 
> Will photography ever go back to the way it was, no, not a chance, will great images always be needed, absolutely. I have to believe this otherwise why do I keep working so hard at it.



It's a chicken or egg, that. The technology has really leapt ahead as well - I mean, the quality pictures I can shoot on my cell phone (Samsung Galaxy S4), with just a touch of editing from a quality app like Snapseed (which has the heavy-handed filters as well, but it's basic editing tools are pretty incredible) are pretty freaking amazing. A basic knowledge of framing and a good eye for a pleasing picture (which some people just have) and people don't even need a good camera to post quality snaps instantly. The fact that people appreciate the good quality is because the quality is available - if our cell phone cameras were still s&*t the s&*t would still outweigh the quality.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Sep 9, 2014)

runnah said:


> Just another cane shaker lamenting the days of yore.



I personally don't see the difference to the days of yore.
My "middle class" family only paid for professional studio portraits of us kids at ages 1,2,3, then Senior pictures (yearly school portraits aside).
That's it. Never saw "professional" shooters at our sports events or birthdays. We only have the snapshots from our mom, for our swimming, and diving competitions.
We have our snaps of family events, and we do that with the phone camera now, because it's convenient, and can share easily.

As an average person, I see the advent of affordable digital has increased demand for baby and toddler themed shoots, and having a dedicated photographer for kids birthdays.
I think, it's my opinion based on my own experiences, that that market increased, then as digital became more affordable, more average people jumped in to become "professional". So, a new market, later became saturated.

I do think it has hit harder for people like imagemaker, and photojournalists. Digital has been a game changer for them.
Family/studio photographers aren't hit by the phone pics that are shared instantly like the OP bemoans. They are killed by the idea that anyone can buy a camera and start a business.
Maybe it shows that (digital) photography really isn't that hard, and there is no longer a demand because people are seeing that, and are capable.
Sure, it's harder to be an exceptional photographer. But average people can become quite decent fairly quickly. This forum shows that.


----------



## Derrel (Sep 9, 2014)

runnah said:


> Just another cane shaker lamenting the days of yore.




Wow.....just wow. What an utterly disrepectful, insolent comment. What's next? Gay slurs? Femi-Nazi rants in the style of Rush Limbaugh?

The last thing TPF needs are well-known members going around making ageist put-downs of members and trying to hide behind alleged "humor".


----------



## rexbobcat (Sep 9, 2014)

Derrel said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > Just another cane shaker lamenting the days of yore.
> ...


----------



## runnah (Sep 9, 2014)

Derrel said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > Just another cane shaker lamenting the days of yore.
> ...



Ageist put-down? You are the KING of the ageist put-down. Or does it only offend when the young pick on the old?


----------



## rexbobcat (Sep 9, 2014)

runnah said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > runnah said:
> ...



There's no such thing as reverse ageism.


----------



## robbins.photo (Sep 9, 2014)

runnah said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > runnah said:
> ...



Wow.  Seriously - you two kids hug it out.

Then both of you get the hell off my lawn.


----------



## Derrel (Sep 9, 2014)

Here's runnah, acting like a third grader, trying to dodge responsibility for insulting an elderly man in said man's own thread. And acting like a big baby, "He did it! He did it! Look at what heeeeeeee did, mama!"

Don't worry runnah, I reported your post as being inappropriate behavior. Maybe next time you can man up, and apologize instead of of trying to dodge your own responsibility for what comes out of that keyboard of yours.


----------



## runnah (Sep 9, 2014)

Derrel said:


> Here's runnah, acting like a third grader, trying to dodge responsibility for insulting an elderly man in said man's own thread. And acting like a big baby, "He did it! He did it! Look at what heeeeeeee did, mama!"



How did I dodge responsibility? I wrote the damn post and left it there. 

I called you out for being a hypocrite.



Derrel said:


> Don't worry runnah, I reported your post as being inappropriate behavior. Maybe next time you can man up, and apologize instead of of trying to dodge your own responsibility for what comes out of that keyboard of yours.



So what you are saying is you tattled on me? Who is the third grader now?


----------



## pthrift (Sep 9, 2014)

lol isn't runnah one of the mods who corrects this sort of thing?

#where'smypopcorn


----------



## runnah (Sep 9, 2014)

pthrift said:


> lol isn't runnah one of the mods who corrects this sort of thing?
> 
> #where'smypopcorn




I am a jr. mod, my powers extend only to the POTM section.


----------



## pthrift (Sep 9, 2014)

runnah said:


> pthrift said:
> 
> 
> > lol isn't runnah one of the mods who corrects this sort of thing?
> ...




and here I was hoping to see some angry "I'll show him" banning.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Sep 9, 2014)

Did I miss something?


----------

