Black Ricco wrote:
There is always somebody jabbin' at somebody then saying "Hey man, I was only kidding" when the finger hits an eye.

As another classic "GWC", fond of taking  pictures of naked women as they sleep, rings in.

Does she know those pics are on the web?

so....is this still a humourous "jab" thread ?

Adams Photography wrote:
Actually "Black Ricco" LMAO, there's nobody sleeping anywhere in my pictures,let alone sleeping naked. You are a sad little man. Outlaws M.C. my ass. You don't even know what a 1%r is.

You mean to tell me that some chick who wasn't drunk out of her mind, retarded, or sleeping  let you take that picture?

WG Rowland wrote:
1%?

Hell, it takes me 2-300 shots before I remember to take the lens cap off..

Relatively easy to do if shooting with a rangefinder.

Black Ricco wrote:
You mean to tell me that some chick who wasn't drunk out of her mind, retarded, or sleeping  let you take that picture?

umm...I don't think that's a chick.

WG Rowland wrote:
1%?

Hell, it takes me 2-300 shots before I remember to take the lens cap off..

HA!  Friggin hilarious!

Black Ricco wrote:
Who are the 1%er's? A new breed of digital photographer who lacks the skill, experience,  and knowledge to actually have a preconception of what they want to do, or how they want to approach a project. They come armed with the belief that if you throw enough shit against the wall some of it is bound to stick. They shoot 100 images in the hopes of getting one "keeper" hence the term, 1%er's.

I'm not talking about "event" shooters who are in environments in which they have no control, and shoot thousands of images simply to make sure they covered the event as thoroughly as they could. No, I'm talking about the "machine gunners" who shoot 300 images for each wardrobe change.

Some of these 1%er's even come on internet forums to ask how they can ease their workflows while freely admitting up front that they're going to toss 40 to 50 percent of their images right from the get-go.

The worst thing about a 1%er, other than the fact their work tends to be sub-par,  is they tend to give their work away which is a detriment to all working photographers. The GWC is simply trying to get a quick flash which, although doesn't help our profession, is, I think, less of a danger than the 1%er's who are actually trying to be taken seriously.

Why the contempt? I don't understand why this is a problem. Does it cheapen photography? So what?

TXPhotog wrote:

Agreed.  Once again we have the "if you don't do it my way you're pond scum" argument.

*Glares at a certain "woman" he had the misfortune of running across. No time to deal with people that aren't in the business and since you aren't and ask me to explain my self, you are rude ...what a WITCH!!!!!!!!!

I HATE people that act all elite becuase they are professional, and I really don't hink this site deos enough to punish those arrogant idiots. Hence the pond scum attitude previals through volunteer staff theat don't have time to deal with people like her.  Need professional staff to have a professional site, which is why I DON'T consider this a professional site, but a hobbiest site that some pros hang out at.

Hhobbiest, staff, hobbiest site. period.  I'm part of one the best noncom video game sites out there, but its STILL hobbiest....despite the fact I'm equal to a  professional level player and we used to have a world chapoin in multple genres there........

waynesglamgirls wrote:
I appreciate what Black Rico is saying that there are "Spray and Pray" shooters out there, who fire of like a machine gun hoping to get some decent images without thinking about the photograph they want to create.  Sometimes you have an image your mind and you want to create it, so shoot 1-12 frames and you have it.  Too me there is no right or wrong, it boils down to the photographer's shooting style and the model's style.  Some models like to pose away as the photographer keeps snapping away which leads to a high energy shoot.  Some models like to work this way.  Some models just like hold there pose until the photographer clicks the shutter and some will let the photographer do the directing.  There are pros out there that are 1%ers.

I almost went blind reading through all these post to finally get to one that makes a very good point....

I'm not adverse to shooting hundreds of frames.....even thousands....or one or two.....but like most professionals I have a goal in mind. With luck I reach it in short order. But like the old saying goes, "the best laid plans of mice and men"....things don't always work as planned....so you keep shooting.

The 1%'ers....they have no plan or even the photographic knowledge to make one.....they just shoot and hope......I'm not sure how every else's clients pay them but mine don't pay for hope.

Black Ricco wrote:
Uh oh... a few minutes have gone by with no response. We can't have that. Lets give the silent lurkers their money's worth.

I've  wanted to respond to this post since I first saw it.

Hey, if you're gonna post a "waaah waaaaah waaaah" thread in a public forum, and make a retard of yourself, don't shoot the messenger when someone points it out.

I'm calmly sitting here in in the warm and comfortable bosom  of  detached amusement as I read the, in your words,  "waaah waaaaah waaaah" defensive protests of much lesser talented individuals such as yourself. It's almost as if you, and the rest of the torch and pitchfork carrying villagers, were thinking to yourselves as you read my opening post, oh my God... he's talking about me.

And btw, if I did decide to shoot the messenger, it would be once or twice, not a thousand. Make sure you e-mail me when you come up with a lighting scheme that involves more than a softbox camera left or camera right. Until then I'll be all atwitter with anticipation.

many of us constantly "overshoot."  why are you so bothered?

Not bothered at all. Simply an observation on my part. You, on the other hand, judging from your post, seems to be the one who's bothered.

Does anyone else have out of focus pictures of naked men they would like to post. I'm sure everyone would love to see them.

My portfolio is filled with soft focus and modern odes to old fashioned glamour.   Some nudes too!

But I was thinking about this 1% stuff.  It's harder to do depending on the gear you use.  Like I have film cameras, only one of which is an auto focus.  The rest are all manual.  Manual film advance.  It's harder to machine gun shoot that way.  Not impossible but definately slower. 
I don't think it makes me better, it's just that since I'm manually focusing (and frequently metering) things anyway, I just take my time with shots.  So much so that sometimes models look stunned, their faces saying...."that's all you're going to take?"

One of these days I'd love to get my hands on a good digital movie camera.  Or just find my super 8 and shoot a sequence and compare frames to a similar series of still shots.  See which has more keepers....

Black Ricco wrote:
You dont see many REAL photoshoots do you? You know how many thousands of pics Playboy and other magazines shoot in a session with a model just to find 5-6 pics for a layout? A couple hundred is nothing...

These kinda guys crack me up. They get a hot blonde with new tits on a sailboat, something they've done  dozens of times before, use the sun as a backlight, have a flunkie hold a reflector, pound off 3000 shots to get one that doesn't suck, and think they're hot shit.

Try shooting a fully chromed Harley engine and then tell me how much you know about lighting and photography.

I could shoot this in 15 minutes with one light.

Edit... I don't mean to disparage your work, it's a beautiful shot, but I could do it in the time stated with the one light.

WG Rowland wrote:
1%?

Hell, it takes me 2-300 shots before I remember to take the lens cap off..

*LMAO*

Black Ricco wrote:
I could shoot this in 15 minutes with one light.

Edit... I don't mean to disparage your work, it's a beautiful shot, but I could do it in the time stated with the one light.

Whadda ya think, FKV PhotoGraphics?

Is he talkin' outta of his ass or what?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Not talking out of my ass at all. 15 minutes. Spent too many years shooting product to lie about it. Put the camera on it, give me composition approval, 15 minutes later I'm done. One speedotron head with a few accessories, but just one head. I've got to look through my archives, but I think I can come up with an example to post, or better yet, you bring that thing down to my studio with a stop watch.

Black Ricco wrote:
The worst thing about a 1%er, other than the fact their work tends to be sub-par,  is they tend to give their work away which is a detriment to all working photographers. The GWC is simply trying to get a quick flash which, although doesn't help our profession, is, I think, less of a danger than the 1%er's who are actually trying to be taken seriously.

How can an idiot giving away garbage ever be a "detriment" or a "danger" to a professional that provides real value to a paying clientele who seek same?

Oh please! (eyes roll in successive loop-de-loops).

The only "danger" that a "1%'er" creates is for the "2%'ers", whom you'll no doubt be warning us about next week...or did osama just buy a new 30 megapixel camera to shoot Americans with?

Get real.

Black Ricco wrote:
Oooookay, Bob... and my dad can beat up your dad.

Don't quite understand the comment. If you doubt I can do it, come here and watch. What does that have to do with your dad.