What are your photography pet hates?

[Tringa]

How long have you got?

More seriously, most of my dislikes have been covered - wonky horizons, overdone processing, brand snobbery,(though I don't see that very often now), gear snobbery, more megapixels must be better, etc.

I'll add -

the opinion that manual exposure is always better. Manual has its place, just like aperture or shutter speed priority,
apologising for posting an HDR photo. No one would dream of apologising for using Lightroom so why apologise for an HDR shot,

and the use of two, IMO very annoying abbreviations/nicknames, -
"togger" and "nifty-fifty"

I don't have much problem with people but probably that is due to my main subjects being landscapes so often the nearest person is a mile away and sometimes much further.

Dave

[xpatUSA]

I have a pet peeve, to do with post responses - since I am no photographer, just a simple pedant:

After posting something technical, complete with links, illustrations and formulae, to be told to "get a life" or "get out there and shoot" or any such comment that includes the phrase "Real World" is really irritating.

[Donald]

Talking about 'glass'. The windows in my house have 'glass'. The thing on the end of my camera is a lens.

[Manfred M]

Talking about 'glass'. The windows in my house have 'glass'. The thing on the end of my camera is a lens.

Which brings up Dave's commentary about "local usage".

I've heard lenses referred to as "glass" since I first got into photography back in the early 1970's. And to be perfectly frank; that is the key material in lens construction.

[Donald]

Which brings up Dave's commentary about "local usage".

Point taken.

[Venser]

Mandatory xkcd reference.

[Polar01]

Venser: well say my friend.

Cheers: Allan

[wilgk]

Being a Pollyanna type of person, who is also a very real arachnophobe... I am glad, glad, glad when someone like the wonderful Geoff, warns in advance, that his thread contains images of spiders which may upset some people

My fear whilst irrational is very real & when viewing on a touch screen device, I feel like I am touching the creature and have been known to throw a phone across the room & run from it, when a 'friend' tagged me in a fb post of spider pictures.

So Geoff, you're my hero!!!

[Kris V]

Being a Pollyanna type of person, who is also a very real arachnophobe... I am glad, glad, glad when someone like the wonderful Geoff, warns in advance, that his thread contains images of spiders which may upset some people

My fear whilst irrational is very real & when viewing on a touch screen device, I feel like I am touching the creature and have been known to throw a phone across the room & run from it, when a 'friend' tagged me in a fb post of spider pictures.

So Geoff, you're my hero!!!

I agree 100 %. I can tolerate any bug, but when it comes to spiders.....even the itty bitty ones are giving me the creeps.
If I use a touch screen, I keep my finger as far away from the critter as I can.
So, Geoff, I join Kay in thanking you for the warning. I just wish every one was as considerate!

[William W]

- it was actually my list!

I didn't collect any royalties for the list - I sent them straight on to you. Two Mars Bars are in the post.

WW

[MrB]

I didn't collect any royalties for the list - I sent them straight on to you. Two Mars Bars are in the post.

WW

Cheers, Bill!

Philip

[escoville]

Photography pet hate: people who cannot discriminate. Anyone can take good pictures by accident, and we never see the thousands of bad ones the professionals must presumably take. But why do we have to see the thousands of bad ones that amateurs take? Or the hundreds of near-identical ones? (Wedding photographers please note.) Conversely, I've seen (though not so often) and rescued some outstanding pictures that people were about to delete because they didn't recognize the quality.

[Venser]

Another one of mine, the website youarenotaphotographer.com. If the person used a camera, they are a photographer, period.

I often find individuals who ridicule the examples from YANAP (website linked above) don't have a solid portfolio themselves.

In relation to the above, the term fauxtographer really grinds my gears.

[Texas Dave]

Another one of mine, the website youarenotaphotographer.com. If the person used a camera, they are a photographer, period.

I often find individuals who ridicule the examples from YANAP (website linked above) don't have a solid portfolio themselves.

In relation to the above, the term fauxtographer really grinds my gears.

I think your link above may have populated a bit of subject matter for the cliff yablonski hates you site. http://www.somethingawful.com/cliff-...i-hate-you-01/

[AlwaysOnAuto]

'You're shooting FILM?'

[chauncey]

where's the dead horse?

[escoville]

Another one of mine, the website youarenotaphotographer.com. If the person used a camera, they are a photographer, period.

I often find individuals who ridicule the examples from YANAP (website linked above) don't have a solid portfolio themselves.

In relation to the above, the term fauxtographer really grinds my gears.

Is someone who tinkles on a piano keyboard a pianist?

I'd never heard of YANAP. The pictures there are universally awful, but they were all put in the public domain, so anyone can comment on them and say they're awful. Although actually in many cases they were knowingly awful, I think, so commenting on them is like not recognizing irony.

[Tom47]

Most of my pet peives are covered HDR, I-Pads and cell phones used in place of a camera and someone that wants a close look at my camera or equipment. I do not let other people handle my cameras or equipment that is the quickest way to hear immortal word OOPS.

[Acorn]

Pictures that have been over-processed.
HDR Images.
Too much use of Photoshop (and the like) ever-so-clever gimmicks.
Official judges appraising wildlife pictures who have no knowledge of a creature's characteristics.
The use of baits in wildlife pictures.

[Acorn]

Pictures that have been over-processed.
HDR Images.
Too much use of Photoshop (and the like) ever-so-clever gimmicks.
Official judges appraising wildlife pictures who have no knowledge of a creature's characteristics.
The use of baits in wildlife pictures.

Oh, and I forgot to say, the use of jargon and sometimes telephone language amongst some postings.