Who is this Photographer? Were you in Shrewsbury today in the park at 2pm?

Gazamonk said:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...rt-London.html
It's people like you who give toggers a bad rep, what's he doing wrong


"People like me who give photographers a bad rep". Good Lord calm down, I am as aware as anyone on here that we get a bad rep from members of the security services and members of the public who have nothing better to do than hassle us. However this is not a public forum its a photography forum and any togs reading these posts know about and can see the humour and the absurdities of public opinion.
FYI, I had just not long read that Daily Mail article and saw a similarity in the 1st photo of the article with the hat and sunglasses and saw an amusing juxtaposition. You think I was trying to say something else ?
"Whats he doing wrong"? Absolutely nothing nor did I say he was it wasn't about the photographer it was about the similarity between the 2 photos. It was other posts that alluded to any pervy wrong doing on the togs part. Re read the posts and get off my case. Jeez :cuckoo: and I will thank you not presume the type of person I am or my character.
Click to expand...

You don't have to be a photographer to join or view these pages so it is in fact open to the public.
 
To swanseamale47

But it's a photography forum! Are you seriously that pedantic.
 
Oh for the love of... Everyone grow up! Laugh at the OP if you find it funny, if not then beggar off out of this thread!
 
Jimmy_Lemon said:
Oh for the love of... Everyone grow up! Laugh at the OP if you find it funny, if not then beggar off out of this thread!
Click to expand...

Hurrah ! Common sense and a sense of humour prevails. Well said lemon.
 
Are you waiting for an invitation to tell us! Or is it a closely guarded secret?
 
kman said:
Are you seriously asking what Gary Glitter's done wrong? :eek:
Click to expand...

So let me get this straight, a photographer takes a pic of random *** and for that he is classed a peodo?
Edit: I typed people in short hand btw.
 
Last edited:
happygolucky said:
So let me get this straight, a photographer takes a pic of random *** and for that he is classed a peodo?
Edit: I typed people in short hand btw.
Click to expand...

Which bit are you misunderstanding? Everyone has been asked to calm down and keep this thread in the light hearted manner it was intended as. Any more posts like this will get it closed for everyone who is taking it in the right way
 
'tis the season to be jolly, tra la la la la' .......... ooops a bit early I see, ah well bah humbug to y'all ;)
 
the man in the photo, who ever he is deserves more respect than the one or two moronic comments made ......grow up lads
 
happygolucky said:
So let me get this straight, a photographer takes a pic of random *** and for that he is classed a peodo?
Edit: I typed people in short hand btw.
Click to expand...

you quoted an article on Gary Glitter and asked 'what's he done wrong?'

Just a bit of humour mate relax! :p

i wasnt implying Gary Glitter was the guy in the OP photo, if thats what you thought I meant.
 
Ok I'll let you all know who it was ...............................................Uncle Bob of course !!
 
I think the best option is to check the "spotted a togger" thread as the tog in the photo was probably snapping the OP with the intention of posting to that thread.
 
kman said:
you quoted an article on Gary Glitter and asked 'what's he done wrong?'

Just a bit of humour mate relax! :p

i wasnt implying Gary Glitter was the guy in the OP photo, if thats what you thought I meant.
Click to expand...

There is a kids playground nearby if that make a difference :p

Ooooooh Controversial lol :lol:

In fact, on the way into the park, where you walk pass the kids playground, we were making a joke about the SAME topic, about society is so nervy these days and people jump to the conclusion far too quickly!
 
Jimmy_Lemon said:
Oh for the love of... Everyone grow up! Laugh at the OP if you find it funny, if not then beggar off out of this thread!
Click to expand...

Your new sig is just so wrong....................;)
 
neil_g said:
I call photoshopped.. Show us your raw Ray...

:p
Click to expand...

LOL, I love shooting into the sun. Pfft, these rules are more like guidelines anyway ! :D







And the most controversial one lol



I am surprise more people don't do it more often lol, which is fine by me!
 
Last edited:
Gazamonk said:
Found Him !!!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1208230/Shamed-Gary-Glitters-hideout-heart-London.html
Click to expand...


It's people like you that highlight why certain men could really benefit from a bra. :lol:

Other than crashing what could have been your favourite shot I would have loved for it to been a forum member because I wonder whether he even saw you or whether he just saw the couple and is now sat in front of his computer thinking "Who is that random photographer crashing my shot?"

By the way I like the shots facing the sun, it gives a fresh angle.
 
Last edited:
Jin said:
More impressed that you didn't need to use any fill-in.

My Dad, (my mentor) always said that outdoor portraits should have the sun placed somewhere behind the subjects vision otherwise your subject begins to squint.
Click to expand...

That's part of the reason but now I do it mainly for effect, amongst other shots.

I did it at the last wedding.



I shoot it up close too.



Now, flare? distracting? really? think I should shot all the above differently because i may or may not got flare?

Seriously?
 
Last edited:
Raymond Lin said:
LOL, I love shooting into the sun. Pfft, these rules are more like guidelines anyway ! :D







And the most controversial one lol



I am surprise more people don't do it more often lol, which is fine by me!
Click to expand...


:lol: oh I remember the argument over one of those, I was not convinced how you had managed it. Since then, I have embraced shooting into the sun and love it! Thanks for the inspiration Raymond, one day mine will match yours *dons determined face* :thumbs:
 
Yv said:
:lol: oh I remember the argument over one of those, I was not convinced how you had managed it. Since then, I have embraced shooting into the sun and love it! Thanks for the inspiration Raymond, one day mine will match yours *dons determined face* :thumbs:
Click to expand...

That caused a lot of controversy purely because people stick to the rules. You won't grow in your art if you start create these boxes for yourself.

I have no qualms about shooting into the sun as you can see, and I take advantage of it every time I see the sun set. :)
 
Jayst84 said:
Shooting into the sun is hardly groundbreaking. I'd go as far as to say it qualifies as a 'rule' of it's own now, in that every bloody wedding photographer does it all the time. (And then proceeds to 'wow' people with their controversial contre-jours). ;)
Click to expand...

Tell that to u8myufo :p
 
I haven't a clue who the other photographer, is but I like the pictures. The close up a few posts back is beautiful. I always feel that in these kinds of shots you're trying portray emotions in pictures, so things like lens flair can make them appear more magical etc. Thats just my opinion though.
 
Raymond Lin said:
That caused a lot of controversy purely because people stick to the rules. You won't grow in your art if you start create these boxes for yourself.

I have no qualms about shooting into the sun as you can see, and I take advantage of it every time I see the sun set. :)
Click to expand...

it's not a case of sticking to rules it's a case of wither or not we like the end result.
 
Sun behind give a nice highlight to the hair etc, but I would have thought you'd have to use fill, either with flash or a reflector.

Is it there's enough light bouncing off the ground you don't need it? or do you just expose for the faces/foreground and ignore the background?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top