[Auzzie-Phoenix]

Gah... the edges on ayers rock in that picture are driving my eyes nuts...

[audiobomber]

I hate overbaked images like the rock(well) above. I pretty much hate milky waterfalls too. And HDR.

[Digitalis]

I hate overbaked images like the rock(well) above.

That image is from Ken Duncan...actually this provokes an interesting game idea...Ken Rockwell Or Ken Duncan?



there are some photographers out there that are so bad there really isn't any difference, the bad ones all go for the same look.

[MadMathMind]

I post a waterfall photo that was shot professionally and looks nice. I get 100 likes on a FB page for waterfalls.
Somebody posts a waterfall picture with their phone and adds filters and bumps the saturation up a billion times, it looks like total crap. They get 200 likes.

I shoot cosplay and models. You'd be amazed at how many love Instagram filters. Like, love them. They believe they look good. (It's sometimes a battle with them. They know if they apply them to my photos and post them, they can land on my "never shooting with again" list.)

What burns me more is I'll return 7-10 nicely composed and edited photos to some of the girls and all they post on their pages are cell-phone selfies. Those actually draw more likes, in general, but that's a different issue....

I take a portrait photo, looks incredible.
Person asks "why is the background all blurry though???"

There was an argument about this on an FB page I follow recently as well... The commentator was like "The focal plane is all messed up." Uh, wut?

---------- Post added 09-24-16 at 10:17 PM ----------

You'll end up frustrated trying to work out why certain pictures get more likes on FB. Takes pictures for yourself and you'll be a lot happier

Also, part of this is random chance, due to how FB selects people to show images. In short, for those who don't know, FB chooses a very small subset of your friends and followers (for a page) to show your content. It's partly random and partly people who have either liked your stuff, messaged you, or commented on your stuff recently. If many of those people like it, then it shows it to more people. If they like it in a certain percentage, they'll show it to more. That's how stuff goes viral.

So you're fighting for your content to be seen. It may not be seen in significant numbers. Your photo may have been seen by 150 people (and got 100 likes) and the guy with 200 likes may have been seen by 500 people. And it is totally true that "likes breed likes" because of what I described above.

[old4570]

Hehehehehehehehehe ...

Oh dear !

People's like what people's like ....

On one forum I post on people's seem crazy dog gone nuts for B&W ...
Even snap shots of buildings ( To me extremely Boring unless its something exceptional ) , but these are nothing exceptional ... Just no effort put into the picture ...
And people's love them ?

So people's like what people's like ....

Sometimes , just sometimes ....
The many are wrong and the one is right ... But what is one to do ? ( People's like what people's like )
Just look at the pictures posted on this forum ...

Some pictures are truly exceptional - fantastic - works off art !
And many are very average ...
And often enough the very average picture gets more likes and feedback than the work of art ...
Its not something that is just seen on FB ,

I am no psychology expert ... But perhaps it has something to do with what people relate to ? ( I don't know ) ...
Or perhaps people are afraid to comment etc on a truly exceptional image ... ( ? ) Because they can't relate to it ...
Perhaps a little like chatting with Leonardo about drawing ?

Or on the flip side ? Perhaps , just perhaps , one is not as ..........................

[arnold]

I am no psychology expert ... But perhaps it has something to do with what people relate to ? ( I don't know ) ...

There is truth to that. After all, what would be the point of art that evoked no, or a negative emotional response from you. A person's whole sense of life is involved in his emotional response to art. I am appalled by what some do to their bodies in the name of art, and it would surprise me if they liked anything I considered good taste. There is objectivity in in art, but that is too off topic for this forum.

[Jonathan Mac]

Being a photographer does not mean you have good taste.

Just have a look at this link - You Are Not A Photographer - Exposing Fauxtographers Since 2011

[micromacro]

Just have a look at this link

Pure joy!
Love this one. Got fired? Trash your corporate suit!
Daily Rewind: A Wet Suit | You Are Not a Photographer

[Racer X 69]

Does this kind of stuff bother anyone else?

Doesn't bother me in the least. What do they know, anyway?






I make photographs for me.


The ones I feel are among the better successes, I share with like minded people.






Over 50 years of making photographs I have made tens of thousands of exposures. I have thrown thousands away. There are thousands more I should have tossed. Some I have kept not because they are good photographs, but because they document a moment in my life that I feel the need to keep.


Occasionally through a combination of skill and dumb luck a truly outstanding image is created. And still, I remain an amateur.

[GalacticPhoto]

It doesn't bother me in a Personal way. Like I am not insulted really by it. It bothers me in a "what is wrong with humans" kind of way. Like, I lose hope for them often. I say them because I am not so sure I haven't evolved into something else.

You do have to consider some things about this phenomenon. I see photographers stressing over the sharpness of a lens but the truth is sharpness doesn't usually sell a photo. Unless you're doing high end portrait work and even then that's very little consideration. We as Photographers should know this by now but yet there's a very high chance even knowing, next time you're looking at lens reviews you're saying "yeah but is this lens sharp enough"

Photography that's been sold for millions, the highest valued stuff isn't even remotely sharp.


I can definitely appreciate the Art of Photography but the stuff I see many times is artistically poor and really overall displeasing to the eye. I've found personally in my life experiences that higher intelligent people generally have better taste which makes me concerned that I see so many poor images get so much attention these days, over the good.

[house]

I've found personally in my life experiences that higher intelligent people generally have better taste which makes me concerned that I see so many poor images get so much attention these days, over the good.

I know *highly* intelligent people with a very naive (not in a good way) taste in art. They just lack the education, in a broad sense, to be sophisticated in that field.

[Quartermaster James]

I am frequently surprised by those photos that I post on my blog that become popular versus those that I think are better.

[normhead]

OK here's my take....

Everyone has different taste.
There is no good taste or bad taste, there is just different taste.

Taking my work to a craft show, maybe 1 in 50 might come into my booth.
I can safely assume, they don't like what I like.
Of those who come in maybe 1 in 10 might actually buy something. The others liked my style, but I just didn't have an image they liked enough to buy.

So, to complete a sale, I need probably 500 people to be at the craft show. That will be people who like what I shoot the way I shoot it. Now I could flatter myself and say they have good taste. But that's not it. They have my taste.

But, if I can sell an image to 1 in 500 people, some of the shows around here almost guarantee you 20,000 people in a weekend. If I go to one of those shows, I'm practically guaranteed 40 sales, and one of my fellow photographers says, if you go to that show, it will pay for your business. At least it pays for his.


So I only need 1/500 people to have "good taste" to make a decent living. And really, who cares if there's a pile with bad taste, as long as they don't feel obligated to hang around my booth, so those with "good taste" can't get in.

[audiobomber]

I see a lot of complaints about milky waterfall pictures too.

What makes you think milky waterfall photos are high art? Sure, I've done them, but I don't get it. To me they're phony and unappealing. I don't object to anyone liking them, that's for them to say. But I object to anyone telling me I should like them.

[paulh]

Being a photographer does not mean you have good taste.

Just have a look at this link - You Are Not A Photographer - Exposing Fauxtographers Since 2011

OMG
Composition 101: Pumpkin And Tires | You Are Not a Photographer