Why do people bother to shoot events ?

[eow]

i did not see cheesecake hit out on anyone in the post #194 he reply...nor it was targetted to anyone...

Oops me bad:embrass:
i'm sorry.

 

[jsbn]

i guess many of them forgotten that there are people living with bearly enough to eat...their children depending on ST pocket funds to go sch...

These people have forgotten them already...which speaks for their current social behaviour...

Talking alone doesn't help.

Let them try it. Having a leg or both immobilised & numbed for a day or 3.

 

[JSNG]

This thread is funny man. So are the response of some anti-event shooter.

If someone who shoot events without monetary return is silly, loser, what about those who shoot portraits, landscape, nature whatsoever as a hobby? Are they any better?

Assuming 4 guys:

1) Event shooter A: Spent 16 hours a week shooting 2 to 3 events. Time spent including setting up ladders, chopping a good spot and chatting with friends while waiting.

2) Portrait/Model shooter B: Spent 16 hours a week shooting 1 or 2 models. Time spent including planning/conceptualising, flipping magazines for ideas of poses, setting up lightings, reflectors, softbox, diffuser, chatting with models, communicating etc etc

3) Landscape shooter C: Spent 16 hours a week shooting 1 or 2 location. Time spent including recee for a good location, studying weather forecast, waking up at 4.30am in the morning to catch the most dramatic lights, setting up tripod and waiting for the moment to happen.. sometime it just doesn't happen..

4) Nature/Macro shooter D: Spent 16 hours a week shooting one or twice. Time spent including searching high and low for birds and insects that's worth shooting while carrying loads of gears hiking in the forest.

If you ask a layman, or even better, the wife, mother or girlfriend of that 4 guys, who is the dumbest of the lot, their answer should be the same. They are equally silly, isn't it? Why work extra 2 days for free? If there are one category that appear more silly than others, it could be the model/portrait shooters because you still have to pay the models and mua, unlike the others which the subject can be shot without incurring additional cost.

Anyone who think one category appears more silly than the others, please bear in mind that to people outside this hobby, you are equally dumb. Or even worse cos you are silly enough to flame and laugh at people in the same boat.

I will like to add another category though, which I think is even much more silly than the rest..
Some photog E who choose to shoot less and spent 16 hours a week in this forum flaming and attacking others, monitoring and anticipating counter-attack and enjoy it.
These guys claim that Photographer A is silly and is a loser in life. But photog A at least got some pictures in return for the time spent. What about photog E? What did he get in return? Who is more dumb? :think:

 

[Caspere]

Wow. A lot of ill feelings floating around for a single thread . . . . .

Told all of your back off a little already you never listen. Now a lot of people ego hurt, :dunno:

*me goes to the fridge to grab some treats, heroes on TV at 9pm* :dunno:

 

[Canonised]

These guys claim that Photographer A is silly and is a loser in life. But photog A at least got some pictures in return for the time spent. What about photog E? What did he get in return? Who is more dumb? :think:

haha .... and you forgot that A still have the emails/mobile nos. of the models ....:bsmilie:
In fact, there are some A here who actually "graduated" and got to shoot TFCDs or become paid-model organisers ...:sweatsm:

 

[bowwow]

Wow. A lot of ill feelings floating around for a single thread . . . . .

Told all of your back off a little already you never listen. Now a lot of people ego hurt, :dunno:

*me goes to the fridge to grab some treats, heroes on TV at 9pm* :dunno:

huh?? today got heroes meh??

 

[Sion]

This thread is funny man. So are the response of some anti-event shooter.

If someone who shoot events without monetary return is silly, loser, what about those who shoot portraits, landscape, nature whatsoever as a hobby? Are they any better?

Assuming 4 guys:

1) Event shooter A: Spent 16 hours a week shooting 2 to 3 events. Time spent including setting up ladders, chopping a good spot and chatting with friends while waiting.

2) Portrait/Model shooter B: Spent 16 hours a week shooting 1 or 2 models. Time spent including planning/conceptualising, flipping magazines for ideas of poses, setting up lightings, reflectors, softbox, diffuser, chatting with models, communicating etc etc

3) Landscape shooter C: Spent 16 hours a week shooting 1 or 2 location. Time spent including recee for a good location, studying weather forecast, waking up at 4.30am in the morning to catch the most dramatic lights, setting up tripod and waiting for the moment to happen.. sometime it just doesn't happen..

4) Nature/Macro shooter D: Spent 16 hours a week shooting one or twice. Time spent including searching high and low for birds and insects that's worth shooting while carrying loads of gears hiking in the forest.

If you ask a layman, or even better, the wife, mother or girlfriend of that 4 guys, who is the dumbest of the lot, their answer should be the same. They are equally silly, isn't it? Why work extra 2 days for free? If there are one category that appear more silly than others, it could be the model/portrait shooters because you still have to pay the models and mua, unlike the others which the subject can be shot without incurring additional cost.

Anyone who think one category appears more silly than the others, please bear in mind that to people outside this hobby, you are equally dumb. Or even worse cos you are silly enough to flame and laugh at people in the same boat.

I will like to add another category though, which I think is even much more silly than the rest..
Some photog E who choose to shoot less and spent 16 hours a week in this forum flaming and attacking others, monitoring and anticipating counter-attack and enjoy it.
These guys claim that Photographer A is silly and is a loser in life. But photog A at least got some pictures in return for the time spent. What about photog E? What did he get in return? Who is more dumb? :think:

After reading this post, now I know how dumb is photography.

Thanks. I'm getting out of it.

Tomorrow I'll put a message in B&S lelong everything including the extra Canon lens caps I've bought just to wear them.

:bsmilie: :bsmilie:

 

[Canonised]

Tomorrow I'll put a message in B&S lelong everything including the extra Canon lens caps I've bought just to wear them.

:bsmilie: :bsmilie:

haha... make sure all YOUR lens caps (Canon and Nikon) get soaked in Dettol overnight before putting them on B&S ...:bsmilie::sweatsm::sweat:

 

[westwest1]

This thread is funny man. So are the response of some anti-event shooter.

If someone who shoot events without monetary return is silly, loser, what about those who shoot portraits, landscape, nature whatsoever as a hobby? Are they any better?

Assuming 4 guys:

1) Event shooter A: Spent 16 hours a week shooting 2 to 3 events. Time spent including setting up ladders, chopping a good spot and chatting with friends while waiting.

2) Portrait/Model shooter B: Spent 16 hours a week shooting 1 or 2 models. Time spent including planning/conceptualising, flipping magazines for ideas of poses, setting up lightings, reflectors, softbox, diffuser, chatting with models, communicating etc etc

3) Landscape shooter C: Spent 16 hours a week shooting 1 or 2 location. Time spent including recee for a good location, studying weather forecast, waking up at 4.30am in the morning to catch the most dramatic lights, setting up tripod and waiting for the moment to happen.. sometime it just doesn't happen..

4) Nature/Macro shooter D: Spent 16 hours a week shooting one or twice. Time spent including searching high and low for birds and insects that's worth shooting while carrying loads of gears hiking in the forest.

If you ask a layman, or even better, the wife, mother or girlfriend of that 4 guys, who is the dumbest of the lot, their answer should be the same. They are equally silly, isn't it? Why work extra 2 days for free? If there are one category that appear more silly than others, it could be the model/portrait shooters because you still have to pay the models and mua, unlike the others which the subject can be shot without incurring additional cost.

Anyone who think one category appears more silly than the others, please bear in mind that to people outside this hobby, you are equally dumb. Or even worse cos you are silly enough to flame and laugh at people in the same boat.

I will like to add another category though, which I think is even much more silly than the rest..
Some photog E who choose to shoot less and spent 16 hours a week in this forum flaming and attacking others, monitoring and anticipating counter-attack and enjoy it.
These guys claim that Photographer A is silly and is a loser in life. But photog A at least got some pictures in return for the time spent. What about photog E? What did he get in return? Who is more dumb? :think:

there is no anti shooters here...Or maybe I have miss a post...

its debating the point why these people behave in this way...while shooting an event...its debating on human behaviour here...not photography...

 

[westwest1]

Talking alone doesn't help.

Let them try it. Having a leg or both immobilised & numbed for a day or 3.

What i feel about these people is they choose to forget the weak...cause they are the powerful and are mobile...

 

[Razor54]

This thread is funny man. So are the response of some anti-event shooter.

If someone who shoot events without monetary return is silly, loser, what about those who shoot portraits, landscape, nature whatsoever as a hobby? Are they any better?

Assuming 4 guys:

1) Event shooter A: Spent 16 hours a week shooting 2 to 3 events. Time spent including setting up ladders, chopping a good spot and chatting with friends while waiting.

2) Portrait/Model shooter B: Spent 16 hours a week shooting 1 or 2 models. Time spent including planning/conceptualising, flipping magazines for ideas of poses, setting up lightings, reflectors, softbox, diffuser, chatting with models, communicating etc etc

3) Landscape shooter C: Spent 16 hours a week shooting 1 or 2 location. Time spent including recee for a good location, studying weather forecast, waking up at 4.30am in the morning to catch the most dramatic lights, setting up tripod and waiting for the moment to happen.. sometime it just doesn't happen..

4) Nature/Macro shooter D: Spent 16 hours a week shooting one or twice. Time spent including searching high and low for birds and insects that's worth shooting while carrying loads of gears hiking in the forest.

If you ask a layman, or even better, the wife, mother or girlfriend of that 4 guys, who is the dumbest of the lot, their answer should be the same. They are equally silly, isn't it? Why work extra 2 days for free? If there are one category that appear more silly than others, it could be the model/portrait shooters because you still have to pay the models and mua, unlike the others which the subject can be shot without incurring additional cost.

Anyone who think one category appears more silly than the others, please bear in mind that to people outside this hobby, you are equally dumb. Or even worse cos you are silly enough to flame and laugh at people in the same boat.

I will like to add another category though, which I think is even much more silly than the rest..
Some photog E who choose to shoot less and spent 16 hours a week in this forum flaming and attacking others, monitoring and anticipating counter-attack and enjoy it.
These guys claim that Photographer A is silly and is a loser in life. But photog A at least got some pictures in return for the time spent. What about photog E? What did he get in return? Who is more dumb? :think:

This is what I consider hitting the nail on the head...

My comment: JSNG :thumbsup:

Suddenly as I read and found out that as the thread drags on, my respect for some of the more 'established' full-time shooters goes down the drain. No matter how they can defend themselves in droves, one word to describe....shallow. :nono:

All the colourful vocabulary and beautiful languages....all 'Lifeless Poetry'.

 

[eow]

This is what I consider hitting the nail on the head...

My comment: JSNG :thumbsup:

Suddenly as I read and found out that as the thread drags on, my respect for some of the more 'established' full-time shooters goes down the drain. No matter how they can defend themselves in droves, one word to describe....shallow. :nono:

same here...the irony the victim who been single out for ridicule...literally worshipped one of them....sigh...life sux:cry:

 

[Cheesecake]

personally feel the remarks to deity kinda of scarcastic...
i never see him putting others down with means remark except when to defend himself and those others which he doesn't even know their names...think carefully and ask yrself....what do u got to lose or gain by irritating/harrassing him?

:think: i wasn't tergetting at anyone.
think u need to read everything from the beginning to get a clear picture.

 

[westwest1]

PC show round the concer...let see what happen...

 

[Luval]

I can understand why some people may want to learn how to shoot these events, just to widen the scope of his/her photographic skills... But if you notice, the same people go to these events over and over. If there was anything to be learned, they would have mastered it already. If not, then it's a lost cause. Which leads me to think that they are not there to learn anything.

These people have a certain look about them. Usually, I don't notice them... but my wife pointed it out to me once, and then it became quite apparent. They have a certain geeky look about them. I say this at the risk of being flamed... but I'm just trying to describe it as accurately as I can, and the purpose is not to offend anyone.

What I think is... these people have a problem expressing themselves under normal circumstance. These events offer them an opportunity to get close to women (who are generally better looking since they are models) and take images of them. Sometimes, it gives them the opportunity to get close to them by offering to take their pictures... Without their cameras, this would have been inconceivable.

Why big guns? With big guns, they can get closer visually.

I think there is nothing bad about it. Teenages go to concerts to scream at their idols... It gives them a rush... and if they like it, who are we to say anything? It may sound a bit sad, but we are all sad in certain ways. Some of us are video game adicts... some of us smoke/drink too much... In comparison, taking pictures of women at events seems quite harmless.

I can understand what u are driving at , my ex gf have also pointed out to me once at another photographer at the Durian building at marina.. Intially it wasnt apparent at it. but after a while. I do see the inability / ies of them . Not the geek look that they have ,, reminded me of 1 person.. hahahha.. skinny and tall .. no no .. bony.. but sometime some of their face tell me nothing.. you know blank face !!..

I came from such circumstances before but thank God that I have grown out of it .. but some stil remind and keep going and going .. althought I still feel the intial rush of it whenever there are fashion show going on.. these feelings just wears away ...

 

[westwest1]

:think: i wasn't tergetting at anyone.
think u need to read everything from the beginning to get a clear picture.

see post #221...

 

[Cheesecake]

see post #221...

paiseh! jus read that post...

 

[westwest1]

paiseh! jus read that post...

i can understand how u feel when u first read the reply against your post...sure flame up one...

 

[Cheesecake]

i can understand how u feel when u first read the reply against your post...sure flame up one...

no leh.. i think its no big deal. i'm certain it's misunderstanding.

besides, we're all too busy and fussed up with putting bread on the table. this sorta thing 100% can't work me up.

it's ClubSnap entertainment.

whichever fotographer genre u love to do, is fine, as long as u're happy and no one gets hurt in the process.

 

[zaxh81]

This thread is funny man. So are the response of some anti-event shooter.

If someone who shoot events without monetary return is silly, loser, what about those who shoot portraits, landscape, nature whatsoever as a hobby? Are they any better?

Assuming 4 guys:

1) Event shooter A: Spent 16 hours a week shooting 2 to 3 events. Time spent including setting up ladders, chopping a good spot and chatting with friends while waiting.

2) Portrait/Model shooter B: Spent 16 hours a week shooting 1 or 2 models. Time spent including planning/conceptualising, flipping magazines for ideas of poses, setting up lightings, reflectors, softbox, diffuser, chatting with models, communicating etc etc

3) Landscape shooter C: Spent 16 hours a week shooting 1 or 2 location. Time spent including recee for a good location, studying weather forecast, waking up at 4.30am in the morning to catch the most dramatic lights, setting up tripod and waiting for the moment to happen.. sometime it just doesn't happen..

4) Nature/Macro shooter D: Spent 16 hours a week shooting one or twice. Time spent including searching high and low for birds and insects that's worth shooting while carrying loads of gears hiking in the forest.

If you ask a layman, or even better, the wife, mother or girlfriend of that 4 guys, who is the dumbest of the lot, their answer should be the same. They are equally silly, isn't it? Why work extra 2 days for free? If there are one category that appear more silly than others, it could be the model/portrait shooters because you still have to pay the models and mua, unlike the others which the subject can be shot without incurring additional cost.

Anyone who think one category appears more silly than the others, please bear in mind that to people outside this hobby, you are equally dumb. Or even worse cos you are silly enough to flame and laugh at people in the same boat.

I will like to add another category though, which I think is even much more silly than the rest..
Some photog E who choose to shoot less and spent 16 hours a week in this forum flaming and attacking others, monitoring and anticipating counter-attack and enjoy it.
These guys claim that Photographer A is silly and is a loser in life. But photog A at least got some pictures in return for the time spent. What about photog E? What did he get in return? Who is more dumb? :think:

Yeah,funny man.... So which category you belong to?