Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 17,316
- Location
- Bristol
Just thought I'd share this email with a misleading job title.
There will be no bapps
.
There will be no bapps
.Misleading job titles
- Thread starter Russinating
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 23,947
- Location
- South East
You're photographing children? Paedophile.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 9,302
Peter File?
- Joined
- 27 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 17,316
- Location
- Bristol
I've done it before, and I'll do it again
.The scary thing is I'm not even CRB checked. You'd think/hope Bath Council would know better.
Disclaimer: I'm not a paedophile.
- Joined
- 27 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 17,316
- Location
- Bristol
EDIT: Might be worth putting on your CV actually
I run my own businesses - such disclaimers are not required
.
You don't have to be if you're not left alone with children.
- Joined
- 27 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 17,316
- Location
- Bristol
Ah, well that's ok then. I certainly wasn't left alone! Here's a few snaps from the day anyway:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 27 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 17,316
- Location
- Bristol
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
C&C most welcome
. Used a new camera on the day and worked very well for this kind of shoot, but did take a fair bit of manual control away.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
C&C most welcome
. Used a new camera on the day and worked very well for this kind of shoot, but did take a fair bit of manual control away.
1) Great - love the colour and composition.
2) Looks wonky.
3) Average.
4) Great capture of expression!
5) Back of someones head
an it's wonky.
6) Why the wonkies!
7) Epic
8) Set's the scene I suppose!
9 & 10) great expressions!
11) does nothing for me.
12) Like the motion!
13) Blurred the wrong bits and OOF!
14) Does nothing for me
15) Cool.
16) again set's a scene!
17) I likes this!
18) Back of someones head!
For me - 1, 4, 7, 12 and 17 are the strongest and I'd also include 8, 9, 10 if I was submitting a set.
The other's are either too wonky or not really of anything. So if it was me sending this off to whoever I'd only send 1,4,7,8,9,10,12,17.
Good set of stuff. Just I think you probably need to be harsher on the stuff you actually post becuase you've posted some great shots alongside a few weaker shots. Just post/send the best!!
Sorry if I've sounded harsh,
p0ss3s3d
- love the colour and composition.2) Looks wonky.
3) Average.
4) Great capture of expression!
5) Back of someones head
an it's wonky. 6) Why the wonkies!
7) Epic
8) Set's the scene I suppose!
9 & 10) great expressions!
11) does nothing for me.
12) Like the motion!
13) Blurred the wrong bits and OOF!
14)
Does nothing for me 15) Cool.
16) again set's a scene!
17) I likes this!
18) Back of someones head!
For me - 1, 4, 7, 12 and 17 are the strongest and I'd also include 8, 9, 10 if I was submitting a set.
The other's are either too wonky or not really of anything. So if it was me sending this off to whoever I'd only send 1,4,7,8,9,10,12,17.
Good set of stuff. Just I think you probably need to be harsher on the stuff you actually post becuase you've posted some great shots alongside a few weaker shots. Just post/send the best!!
Sorry if I've sounded harsh,
p0ss3s3d
- Joined
- 27 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 17,316
- Location
- Bristol
Not harsh at all, totally fair crit! I did go a bit wonky to be honest, I'm normally one for strict rules of thirds and horizontal/leading lines etc, but the atmosphere just seemed to suit a bit of off-angle shots. Some work, some don't, but hopefully got a good mix for the client though if that's not their cup of tea.
As for the backs of heads, this was actually in the brief. They wanted to avoid kids faces as much as possible for legal reasons (although they had signs up saying anyone in the grounds agreed to photos, things might get tricky if someone sees their kid's massive face on a banner or something).
It wasn't a high paid job and although I had a brief as to what kind of shots they wanted (see below), they didn't tell me what they'd be used for. I sent ~150 photos to the client (only took 300 on the day), mainly because the wage didn't warrant spending ages filtering through and editing them. A lot were duplicates though, for example the same scene with and without the kid's face, with and without wonk etc.
Brief:
As for the backs of heads, this was actually in the brief. They wanted to avoid kids faces as much as possible for legal reasons (although they had signs up saying anyone in the grounds agreed to photos, things might get tricky if someone sees their kid's massive face on a banner or something).
It wasn't a high paid job and although I had a brief as to what kind of shots they wanted (see below), they didn't tell me what they'd be used for. I sent ~150 photos to the client (only took 300 on the day), mainly because the wage didn't warrant spending ages filtering through and editing them. A lot were duplicates though, for example the same scene with and without the kid's face, with and without wonk etc.
Brief: